• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

good camera lens brands?

pontifex

pontifex

Lifer
what are some good reputable brands? my dad gave me a Tamron 70-300mm lens. seems to do ok for what i am doing.

i don't need the best or anything like that, just something that will take good pictures.

right now i have a 18-55mm and the 70-300mm lens. i have access to a 20-80mm (i believe) through my dad. he has some other lenses i can use but is hesitant to let me use them since they are expensive.

what else should i have for my camera?
 
i sure could use a tamron 70-300mm. cheapest / good lens for the medium telephoto range.

for a good walkaround, try the tamron 24-135mm. it goes on ebay for around $200-250.
 
Tamron, Sigma, Tokina, Canon, and Nikkor (Nikon) all make good lenses. But there are ones in those brands that are great, and others that just plain suck. Do some research before buying a lens. Check out http://www.fredmiranda.com and click on "reviews" for good legit lens reviews.
 
Originally posted by: Mrvile
Tamron, Sigma, Tokina, Canon, and Nikkor (Nikon) all make good lenses. But there are ones in those brands that are great, and others that just plain suck. Do some research before buying a lens. Check out http://www.fredmiranda.com and click on "reviews" for good legit lens reviews.
Click to expand...

Good advice here. :thumbsup: Tamron, Sigma, Tokina have been around a long time.
 
You should have a 50mm f/1.8 Lens. For example, you can pick up the Nikon lens for $105. The Canon is usually comparable.
If you have extra money to burn go for the f/1.4. But for the $$ the f/1.8 is awesome.

 
Originally posted by: spacelord
You should have a 50mm f/1.8 Lens. For example, you can pick up the Nikon lens for $105. The Canon is usually comparable.
If you have extra money to burn go for the f/1.4. But for the $$ the f/1.8 is awesome.
Click to expand...

so whats the difference between a lens with a single mm rating and one with a range 18-55? what does the 50mm do that a 18-55 set to 50mm can't?
 
I currently own Canon and Tamron. Bought a Sigma but wasn't too pleased and sold it.

My Tamron 28-75 F2.8 is pretty close (optically) to the Canon 24-70 F2.8L for like 25% the price.
 
Originally posted by: pontifex
Originally posted by: spacelord
You should have a 50mm f/1.8 Lens. For example, you can pick up the Nikon lens for $105. The Canon is usually comparable.
If you have extra money to burn go for the f/1.4. But for the $$ the f/1.8 is awesome.
Click to expand...

so whats the difference between a lens with a single mm rating and one with a range 18-55? what does the 50mm do that a 18-55 set to 50mm can't?
Click to expand...

Lighter, brighter, sharper.

Since most entry level Canon and Nikon DSLRs have a crop factor of about 1.5x, get a lens in the ~30mm range to get that 50mm focal length.
 
Originally posted by: iamtrout
Originally posted by: pontifex
Originally posted by: spacelord
You should have a 50mm f/1.8 Lens. For example, you can pick up the Nikon lens for $105. The Canon is usually comparable.
If you have extra money to burn go for the f/1.4. But for the $$ the f/1.8 is awesome.
Click to expand...

so whats the difference between a lens with a single mm rating and one with a range 18-55? what does the 50mm do that a 18-55 set to 50mm can't?
Click to expand...

Lighter, brighter, sharper.

Since most entry level Canon and Nikon DSLRs have a crop factor of about 1.5x, get a lens in the ~30mm range to get that 50mm focal length.
Click to expand...

High quality, fast zoom lenses are big bucks. Primes are generally cheaper but you don't get the flexibility of a zoom (ie. you end up carrying around a heavy bag full of lenses). It's a trade off. In the end you trade your money for quality lenses. :laugh:
 
Exactly. You sacrifice zoom/flexibility for an extremely fast and sharp lens. my 50mm f/1.8 prime lens is great for portraits and taking shots indoors without a flash in many situations.

The Forgotten Lens
 
Canon Setup:

Tamron 28-75 F/2.8
Canon 70-200 F2.8 or F4 L (Get a 1.4TC for this lens to get more Focal Length)
Wide angle - 16-35 or 17-40.

Nikon...?

Don't know much but the 70-200 is just as good as the Canon L.
but you HAVE to get the 17-55 F/2.8...I want that lens for the Canon so bad.


Primes: It's a whole different ball game...Get a 50mm 1.8 (1.4 if you have $ to blow) 85mm (portrait) the 100mm Macro is a nice lens too.
 
Originally posted by: PHiuR
Canon Setup:

Tamron 28-75 F/2.8
Canon 70-200 F2.8 or F4 L (Get a 1.4TC for this lens to get more Focal Length)
Wide angle - 16-35 or 17-40.

Nikon...?

Don't know much but the 70-200 is just as good as the Canon L.
but you HAVE to get the 17-55 F/2.8...I want that lens for the Canon so bad.


Primes: It's a whole different ball game...Get a 50mm 1.8 (1.4 if you have $ to blow) 85mm (portrait) the 100mm Macro is a nice lens too.
Click to expand...

The 50mm f/1.4 is much much better than the f/1.8. Bokeh is fantastic with the 1.4 but not so good with the 1.8.
 
I'm a bit biased but I'd stick with Nikon glass over 3rd party lenses. The exception would be macro - seems like no one makes a bad macro lens.

Base you lens decisions on your shooting style. Do you shoot wide or tele more? Do you use everything in your zoom range or do you tend to stick within a certain focal length? Do you feel limited by your aperture range and want to open up more? Buy lenses based on how you plan to use them, not because you're collecting them.

My primary lens is a 17-55/2.8. It's a great all purpose lens for landscapes and candids, ideal for travel. In lowlight situations I have a 35/1.4 AIS and 50/1.4. I'll also switch between the 2 when I don't feel like carrying the 17-55 around.

For portrait I have an 85/1.4 and 105/1.8 AIS. Both get used at shallow DOF frequently. I also have a 180/2.8 for headshots and anything else that needs the extra length.

Ultimately lenses are a very personal decision. Shoot with what you have and figure out what holes you want to fill before you start buying more gear.
 
a 50mm prime is something no dSLR owner should be without considering the low price, fast aperture, and generally good image quality.

A 28-70mm 2.8 zoom is one helluva useful lens to have, every 3rd party manufacturer makes one, but the Tamron XR Di is the best of the bunch. Canon doesn't have anything to match it in the price range, I'm not sure about a Nikkor equivalent.

90% of the time I have my Sigma 70-200 2.8 on my 20D. I literally don't know what I'd do without it, but unless you want to shoot sports it's not exactly necessary.
 
I still have a beautiful K mount Pentax-A SMC 1:2.8 28mm lens that I barely used before selling of my last 35mm. Now I see that it's adaptable to their digitals, so I'm gonna look into that or else trade it off.

I still kick myself for passing on a true Pentax 400mm in sweet condition at a shop in Vancouver for a few hundred U.S. back around '94.
 
Originally posted by: Snagle
a 50mm prime is something no dSLR owner should be without considering the low price, fast aperture, and generally good image quality.

A 28-70mm 2.8 zoom is one helluva useful lens to have, every 3rd party manufacturer makes one, but the Tamron XR Di is the best of the bunch. Canon doesn't have anything to match it in the price range, I'm not sure about a Nikkor equivalent.

90% of the time I have my Sigma 70-200 2.8 on my 20D. I literally don't know what I'd do without it, but unless you want to shoot sports it's not exactly necessary.
Click to expand...

I :heart: my Sigma 70-200 2.8. Sports, airshows, and wildlife are great with it. It was between 1/2 and 1/3 what a similar Canon "L" lens would go for. A great value for the $$.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top