What Lense and How Much

OREGATO

Right guys,

I've been using the kit lens that came with my Canon 500d for the past few weeks and I think I want/need a new lenses, one with better zoom, I find that most of the time when I'm taking pictures of landscapes, I'm just too far away to get a good picture, the frame isn't filled enough, i.e. too much sky or too much landscape and not enough of subject. I need to zoom in.

Seeing as there are vast amounts of lenses out there, I'd really appreciate some help on picking out a lense that would suit my needs and also a rough price that I should budget around. I'd consider second hand as well.

Thanks in advance

hbr

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055919436

Unless you have a lot of cash to spare, you will find that you may have to
choose between the zoom lens you actually want and one you can afford.

The two obvious choices are the Canon 55-250mm IS and the
Sigma 70-300mm F/4.0-5.6 (APO version). Both are often available
second hand on adverts.ie and eBay.

More expensive options are the Canon 70-300mm IS and the
Canon 70-200mm L series of lenses.

magicbastarder

someone else here will probably be able to tell you exactly what the tool is, but there's a piece of software which can analyse your shots and show you a graph of shots and the focal length at which they were taken - might help confirm that they're all bunched up at the long end of your current lens, but it might surprise you too.

OREGATO

Thanks HBR,

The Sigma 70-300m looks good and is within price range. How reliable are Sigma (build quality etc) would it be right for what I'm after.

A typical example of what I mean is this shot. Ok, it's not great, but I would have liked to zoom in more on the castle structure



Would the lenses mentioned above be sufficent for what I'm after?

hbr

OREGATO wrote: »

Thanks HBR,

The Sigma 70-300m looks good and is within price range.

There are a few budget 7x-300mm lenses on the market. The popular ones
are the Canon 75-300mm, The Tamron 70-300mm and the two Sigma
70-300mm models. There isn't a lot to choose between them, but according
to most reviews, the Sigma 70-300mm APO f/4-5.6 is marginally better than
the others.

How reliable are Sigma (build quality etc) would it be right for what I'm after.

Built quality is reasonable. Visibly better than the 18-55mm kit lens. It
has a metal lens mount and comes with a very effective hood. The
'macro' switch is a source of great annoyance to many users. It is
inclined to stick in the macro position. You have to switch to manual focus
and fiddle about with the focus ring to get it back into normal mode.
This doesn't bother me too much because I never use it anyway.

A typical example of what I mean is this shot. Ok, it's not great, but I would have liked to zoom in more on the castle structure

It would be good for this kind of shot. You can get a lot closer to the castle
with a 300mm lens. 300/55=4.5 ish. To get the sharpest possible image, I
would probably zoom to about 200mm and stop down to f/8 - 11. Like most
long telephoto lenses, the Sigma is a little soft at it's longest length.

It wouldn't be a good lens for indoor shots or fast action. It is slow
both optically and mechanically. For outdoor shots in good light, it
is hard to beat for the price. They are quite cheap to buy. Mine cost
€95 used on eBay. Even if you buy a new one, you can expect to
recover most of the purchase price if you decide to sell it on
when you upgrade to a more expensive lens.

Would the lenses mentioned above be sufficent for what I'm after?

Probably, although you are the only one who can decide.

Most of the shots here were taken with the Sigma on a 500D:
http://pix.ie/corkpix/album/371360

OREGATO

HBR, thanks again, how about the 55 250? i see camera exchange have it here within my budget

http://www.cameracentre.ie/lenses/canon/400/ef-55-250mm-f4-5.6-is

Also,

is this the lense that you are referring to above?

http://www.cameracentre.ie/lenses/sigma/483/70-300mm-f4-5.6-apo-dg-macro

jpb1974

Looking at the photo you presented I'd say that you should really be trying to get physically closer to the subject(s) you want to photograph and from there working on what is the best composition.

Telephoto Zoom lens have slightly more of limited application for landscape photography. I tend to use my wide angled lenses 80% of the time, my 50mm 10% and a zoom (Canon 70-200 F4 L got for about €400 on the 2nd Hand Market - outstanding lens) may 10% of the time.

OREGATO

jpb1974 wrote: »

Looking at the photo you presented I'd say that you should really be trying to get physically closer to the subject(s) you want to photograph and from there working on what is the best composition.

Telephoto Zoom lens have slightly more of limited application for landscape photography. I tend to use my wide angled lenses 80% of the time, my 50mm 10% and a zoom (Canon 70-200 F4 L got for about €400 on the 2nd Hand Market - outstanding lens) may 10% of the time.

Thanks for that, what would you recommend for landscape photography though, i found myself on sandymount beach trying to take pictures of the windsurfers and i was just too far away.

I'd say 75% of my shots would be landscape.

What wide angled lenses would you recommend?

jpb1974

I use a Canon 5D MKII so it's a full frame camera and typically what I use would be:

16-35mm F2.8 L - Wide Angle for landscape
50mm F1.8 - Portraits, the odd landscape and general walk around
70-200mm F4 L - Sports, portrait and the odd landscape
100-400m F5.6 L - Wildlife

I also have a Sigma 10-20mm which I use for wide angle stuff on some of my other bodies.

The only lens I'm really missing is the 28-70mm F2.8 L which would be useful as a good all rounder.

The 70-200mm F4 L is a cracking L lens and one of Canon's cheaper L models. On a cropped sensor such as the 50D it might be good for windsurfer shots but it could be a tad on the short side methinks.. you might want to reach at least up to the 300mm mark there.

hbr

OREGATO wrote: »

HBR, thanks again, how about the 55 250? i see camera exchange have it here within my budget

I have never used the 55-250mm so I can't comment on it. I believe they
are quite good for the price. Similar design and quality to the 18-55mm
kit lens and you get the advantage of IS.

is this the lense that you are referring to above?

That's the one. Make sure you get the one with Canon mount. You
would have to be fairly silly to buy the Nikon or Sony mount version, but
it would be very easy to accidentally order the Sigma camera mount version.

You can get better prices on both lenses if you shop around. On-line
prices will get you either one for below €200 new and €100-150 used.

magicbastarder

OREGATO wrote: »

Thanks for that, what would you recommend for landscape photography though, i found myself on sandymount beach trying to take pictures of the windsurfers and i was just too far away.

i think your use of landscape photography is confusing - photos of windsurfers wouldn't usually be termed landscape photography.

OREGATO

Thanks again jpb,

I'm thinking of getting this one now. What would be the best wide angle lense?

http://www.connscameras.ie/sigma-70300mm-f45-6-apo-dg-macro--lens/p-085126508272pd.html

OREGATO

magicbastarder wrote: »

i think your use of landscape photography is confusing - photos of windsurfers wouldn't usually be termed landscape photography.

Sorry, I should have clarified my point. I would say that the windsurfers weren't landscape photos, but from a zoom point of view, I was too far away, I guess what I want is two fold.

One, to be able to capture a wide shot, I.e. a nice landscape and two to be able to zoom significantly more than the kit lens.

magicbastarder

you need more than one lens to be able to do both, unfortunately.

jpb1974

The best wide angle would depend on your budget.

Going from cheapest to most expensive you have:

Sigma 10-20mm - (For cropped sensors)
Canon EF-S 10-22mm - (For cropped sensors)
Canon SF 17-40MM L F4 - (Cropped and Full Frame sensors)
Canon SF 16-35MM L F2.8 - (Cropped and Full Frame sensors)

I've probably missed a few here (Tamron, Tokina) but that aside these are all regarded as pretty good lenses. If you're on a budget then the Sigma would be your starting point.

You could go even further then and dabble into Canon fit Zeiss lenses... but that's another story (mega €€€).

OREGATO

I guess I'll start with the one I quoted from conns, it seems to be the best for what is my priority (zoom) after than I can move onto the wide angle.

Can someone please explain the signifcance of a nifty fifty while we're here?

Thanks for the list of lenses btw but I had a quick look at the sigma one and it was way out of budget for me right now.

jpb1974

Nifty Fifty

Cheap
Small
Light
Good Image Quality
Large Aperture (bokeh, low light situations)
Good portrait lens

magicbastarder

two best things about the 50mm - shallow depth of field, and it's good in low light.

OREGATO

Cheers lads, I'll pick up the Sigma lense I think

hbr

OREGATO wrote: »

Can someone please explain the signifcance of a nifty fifty while we're here?

'Nifty Fifty' generally refers to a fast (large aperture) 50mm prime lens. The
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 is a good and relatively cheap example. I have one
and it works beautifully with the 500D. Great for portraits and indoor shots
in low light. 50mm is considered as a 'normal' focal length on a 35mm film
camera or a full frame DSLR. It has a smaller field of view on an APS size
sensor as used in the 500D where it is equivalent to an 80mm lens on
35mm/full-frame.

Thanks for the list of lenses btw but I had a quick look at the sigma one and it was way out of budget for me right now.

Unfortunately, good quality wide angle lenses are expensive. That's why I
don't have one