Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 7, 2006, 11:50 PM   #1
Member
 
leooz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 31
Default

I'm going to buy a digi rebel xt, but im not quite sure what lenses to buy
my budget is only about 600~800 for all the lenses

im going to be shootin:
  1. Macro fotos (dont want to get too close to the object)
    [/*]
  2. A wide angle lanscape foto[/*]
  3. some protraits[/*]
  4. Telefoto[/*]
  5. Sport fotos (optional)[/*]
  6. some interior fotos of house[/*]
  7. architectures[/*]
Thx for ur advices^^
leooz is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 8, 2006, 7:48 AM   #2
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Well, you definitely want a lot of coverage for only $800. You have a few routes you can go - all involve compromise. Based upon your stated needs, I might suggest the following:

Canon 17-85 (interior, architecture, landscape) = $500 but can save a little by buying as a kit with the camera.

That takes care of your primary lens. Now the choice - which is more important, telephoto or macro?

If macro is extremely important, I might suggest the following:

Sigma 105 2.8 EX macro = $380

Otherwise, given your price restrictions I might suggest the Sigma 70-300 Super Macro. It's a decent lens for the price, but don't expect excellence from a $200 lens covering such a large range. And, it's focus and slow aperture are probably too slow to be a lot of use as a sports lens. But, with your budget it might be a nice compromise. The Canon 70-300 is better, especially with IS - but that goes for around $570 which blows your budget.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2006, 10:55 AM   #3
Member
 
leooz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 31
Default

thx, macro is more of my concern, but actually thats just an estimated budget. i stil hav sum thousands of dolars spare.. i just wish to buy a few important lenses to start with. but i dun want to hav to replace them with better ones later.

and i thot zat the canon 70~300 IS lens doesnt support macro mode?

how is the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM?
leooz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2006, 11:25 AM   #4
Junior Member
 
Bulldogger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 22
Default

Wow, that avatar is annoying.:?
Bulldogger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2006, 12:20 PM   #5
Member
 
leooz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 31
Default

do u mean zat it hurts ur eye T.T?
I made it, lol

no one wants to help me QQ
leooz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2006, 8:24 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 142
Default

I have the Canon Rebel XT. I only have 2 lens for now.

Sigma 70-300mm 4-5.6 and the Canon 18-55mm kit lens.

I have taken some nice shots with both lens. Both of sports, landscapes, and nature shots. Most were very nice. I think with your budget you should be ok.
photo118 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2006, 4:43 AM   #7
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Sounds like you want a good all-round solution.

I would recommend the

EF-S 17-85 IS USM (Buy this with the XT as the more expensive kit lens)
EF 70-300 IS USM

Both are good optically and have fast AF and Image Stabilisation. They make an excellent all-round solution IMO.

These aren't fantastic macro lenses, but you might be surprised what you can do with them.

Dedicated macro lenses cost a bit, but you can get the Sigma f2.8 50mm Macro 1:1 for around $250. The real question is whether you really need a 1:1 macro or whether the normal close-up mode of the other lenses will be sufficient? I suggest you get the two lenses I recommended above and then save up for a 1:1 macro lens later if you find you really need it. There are a whole range of other specialist macro lenses available. Be aware for specialist macro work you will probably want to buy specialist macro flash gear and very good tripod too. Total cost for a "serious" macro setup is probably at least $1000.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2006, 1:20 PM   #8
Member
 
leooz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 31
Default

I think I will get the 17~85 and 70~300 IS USM everyone suggested
but now my question turns out to be whether to buy the xt or 20d cuz they're not too much different in cost.

Sunds like 20d is gana be updated soon. but i duno if i rili need zat good a dslr...
wuts the main difference between them?
leooz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2006, 1:38 PM   #9
Member
 
leooz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 31
Default

I checked the test on pbase
http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/apovis

is the main difference between the two lenses (Sigma 70300 APO DG and Canon 70300 IS) the IS integration?

then why is the sigma lenses usually cheaper?

leooz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2006, 2:50 PM   #10
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

leooz wrote:
Quote:
I checked the test on pbase
http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/apovis

is the main difference between the two lenses (Sigma 70300 APO DG and Canon 70300 IS) the IS integration?

then why is the sigma lenses usually cheaper?
-> then you should check out this one out too:
http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/zoomvprimes

:lol: :-) :G
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:35 PM.