Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Novice looking for second lens

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VBC
    Posts
    28

    Default Novice looking for second lens

    I've just brought a Canon Rebel XTI 400D and I'm still learning how to use it. But I'm alreadly looking at buying my next lens and would like advice from the forum as to which one. The Rebel XTI came with a EF-S 18-55 lens, I'm looking for a quility all around lens for landscapes, wildlife etc.and want to stay withinn the Canon family. I'm leaning towards the Canon EF 24-105 F/4 L IS USM or the EF 70-200 F/4 L IS USM....Thanks in advance for any help and sugestions you can provide.

  2. #2
    Member Hunt'N'Photos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Eagle River, Alaska
    Posts
    1,210

    Default What do you like to shoot?

    If your into wildlife at all I would opt for the 70-200 next for the range it offers. It will give you double focal length of the 24-105. As you get more and more into it I would also look at replacing that kit lens with something a little higher quality. It should suit you for a while, but there are alot nicer lenses out there of much higher quality. Be careful though, its very addicting and I had trouble living within my budget when I was first starting out.
    US Air Force - retired and Wildlife photographer

    To follow my photography adventures check out my facebook page

  3. #3
    Member Hunt'N'Photos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Eagle River, Alaska
    Posts
    1,210

    Default

    And by the way, congrats on your purchase. You will have alot of fun with that camera!
    US Air Force - retired and Wildlife photographer

    To follow my photography adventures check out my facebook page

  4. #4
    Member Majik Imaje's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Living @ the Top of the World in Barrow Alaska
    Posts
    628

    Exclamation Lenses.. .. so many to choose from

    So many different combinations, focal lengths, and a lot of reading and learning to figure out what is best for your situation or needs.

    My needs only ever requred one lens!

    One lens at a time is all that can be used on any camera. (joking)

    The main thing is, what do you need a second lens for ? what is the MAIN purpose for this second lens? Usually it is used to expand the field of view (wide) or narrow the field of view (tele -zoom).

    Every photographer has different situations which require a different "eye" to record or capture the image.

    I have been living in the Arctic taking photographs for over 25 years.
    it is not necessarily which lens to use.. but how to "FILL THE FRAME" the viewfinder. with "detail"

    I have only used one lens. And I was able.. as a novice. and as a hobby,
    to retire quite handsomly from the sales of my images in over 50 countries thorought the world. I had to melt snow to develop MY color film!

    http://majikimaje.com/FrontPage.jpg

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,083

    Default

    There are outstanding Sigma, Tamron, and Tokina lenses you can use to replace the kit lens if that's what you want. Some of these lenses are up there near the Canon L lenses of the same size, and are not as expensive. For example, the super wide Tokina 12-24mm ATX124 Pro DX costs $499.00 at B&H, and is used by amateur and professional photographers as well. Tamron has an 18-55mm lens which can be used to replace the kit lens, and so Sigma with their 17-70mm. You can see what people have to say about all of these lenses, including all Canon lenses in here:
    http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...splay.php?f=33

    All the landscape photos I have posted in this forum were taken with the kit lens set at 18mm, but there were times when I wished a little wider lens. I just purchased the Tokina lens i mentioned above (12-24mm), and plan to use it for all my landscape shots, probably set somewhere from 14mm to 18mm. I still have to put this lens through its paces, but I have no doubts that it will be a terrific lens.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VBC
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hunt'N'Photos View Post
    If your into wildlife at all I would opt for the 70-200 next for the range it offers. It will give you double focal length of the 24-105. As you get more and more into it I would also look at replacing that kit lens with something a little higher quality. It should suit you for a while, but there are alot nicer lenses out there of much higher quality. Be careful though, its very addicting and I had trouble living within my budget when I was first starting out.
    Thanks for the advice, I've been leaning toward the 70-200 for the extra reach as the price is about the same.

  7. #7
    Member ak_powder_monkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Eagle River/ Juneau
    Posts
    5,154

    Default

    You can buy my tokina 80-400 for $300 + shipping

    details here
    http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=288080
    I choose to fly fish, not because its easy, but because its hard.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,083

    Default

    Forgot to mention that right here in this forum there is a Canon telephoto L lens for sale. This would be a great wildlife lens, and you can use a tele-converter with it to double its reach.

    Just scroll down the page to a post by BTK. Here is what he posted:
    Canon Telephoto EF 300mm f/4.0L IS Image Stabilizer USM Autofocus Lens
    18 months old. Approx 500 photos. Works great, wanting to upgrade. $750 shipped in AK.
    That's one of the popular Canon telephoto lenses, and you can use tele-converters from 1x-2x with it. Now, to replace the kit lens there are good choises as i told you above.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    3,568

    Default

    I would choose the Canon 70-200 F2.8 with the matching Canon 1.4 and 2 x converters.
    This set up is my most used combo in my bag when I head out on a shoot.
    Little pricey but it will last you forever. My converters are over 15 years old.
    Tennessee

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,449

    Default

    Canon's best replacement for the cheap 18-55 is the 17-55 f/2.8 IS. It's an amazing lens if you need a normal range zoom. But for most uses the 18-55 is a decent lens all by itself. You have to stop it down to f/8 to make it real sharp, but it does do it. Personally, I would keep the cheap kit lens unless you find a reason why it's not adequate. I bought the 17-55 f/2.8 IS because I needed sharp images and f/2.8 at the same time. Not many zoom lenses will do that.

    The 24-105 f/4L is a very good lens, but 24mm is not very wide on a crop sensor body like the digital Rebel, or 30D. It's about like a 38mm lens on a film camera, and I would hate being limited to that. Some have different opinions though. For some people a wide zoom (10-22 or 12-24) in combination with the 24-105 will work well.


    I agree with the above that all of Canon's 70-200 L lenses are great, but they do offer four versions of that right now -- priced anywhere from $600 to $1700 or so. However, Canon's new 70-300 USM IS lens is also an optically superb lens. It's not as durable as the L series lenses, but is very nearly as sharp, far lighter, and the Image Stabilization mostly makes up for the slower aperture. Plus, the clean high ISO images from the XTi allow you to use smaller apertures than film cameras ever did. Don't confuse this lens with any of Canon's earlier 75-300 lenses -- the 70-300 is far sharper.

    I agree with the above comment about the Tokina 12-24 being a great lens. I have one myself, but I think the Canon 10-22 is a better buy in the long run. It's 20% wider, has FTM focusing, and will retain it's value far better if you decide to sell it in the future.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,083

    Default

    Jim: You are correct about the Canon 10-20mm, but I seldom use my Tokina down to 12mm. I use it from 14mm to maybe 18mm. My pocket can't justify the extra money for a similar Canon lens. Canon does make great lenses. For wildlife photography using lenses past 200mm, I completely agree with you that Canon L is the way to go.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VBC
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RayfromAK View Post
    Forgot to mention that right here in this forum there is a Canon telephoto L lens for sale. This would be a great wildlife lens, and you can use a tele-converter with it to double its reach.

    Just scroll down the page to a post by BTK. Here is what he posted:


    That's one of the popular Canon telephoto lenses, and you can use tele-converters from 1x-2x with it. Now, to replace the kit lens there are good choises as i told you above.
    RayfromAK
    I saw that lens for sale here in the forum and a great price, but unfortunately I'm working outside the US for a while and would not be able to close any sale in a timely manner.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VBC
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Strutz View Post
    Canon's best replacement for the cheap 18-55 is the 17-55 f/2.8 IS. It's an amazing lens if you need a normal range zoom. But for most uses the 18-55 is a decent lens all by itself. You have to stop it down to f/8 to make it real sharp, but it does do it. Personally, I would keep the cheap kit lens unless you find a reason why it's not adequate. I bought the 17-55 f/2.8 IS because I needed sharp images and f/2.8 at the same time. Not many zoom lenses will do that.

    The 24-105 f/4L is a very good lens, but 24mm is not very wide on a crop sensor body like the digital Rebel, or 30D. It's about like a 38mm lens on a film camera, and I would hate being limited to that. Some have different opinions though. For some people a wide zoom (10-22 or 12-24) in combination with the 24-105 will work well.


    I agree with the above that all of Canon's 70-200 L lenses are great, but they do offer four versions of that right now -- priced anywhere from $600 to $1700 or so. However, Canon's new 70-300 USM IS lens is also an optically superb lens. It's not as durable as the L series lenses, but is very nearly as sharp, far lighter, and the Image Stabilization mostly makes up for the slower aperture. Plus, the clean high ISO images from the XTi allow you to use smaller apertures than film cameras ever did. Don't confuse this lens with any of Canon's earlier 75-300 lenses -- the 70-300 is far sharper.

    I agree with the above comment about the Tokina 12-24 being a great lens. I have one myself, but I think the Canon 10-22 is a better buy in the long run. It's 20% wider, has FTM focusing, and will retain it's value far better if you decide to sell it in the future.
    Jim

    That was my throught reguarding the Canon L series, quility and dependability for years of use

  14. #14
    Member EricL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska to Stay
    Posts
    670

    Talking here we go again

    All this talk about lenses is getting my "lens lust" fired up again!!

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,083

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EricL View Post
    All this talk about lenses is getting my "lens lust" fired up again!!


    Yes, it would be nice to buy the best lenses around. Cameras are cheaper than some lenses, and are upgraded by Canon almost each year.

  16. #16

    Default

    Big Jim Canon 70-200mm 2.8 IS L Canít beat it for sharpness and speed Ö.expensive yes but what you might call a one off buy Ö


    cheers

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •