• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Good second lens?

E

enlightenedby42

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
4,412
My girlfriend is really starting to get into digital photography, and bought a Cannon Rebel XT a while back. So, apologies for knowing NOTHING about this stuff, but it's for a gift.

She's needing a new lens besides the one that came with it. The stock lens is routinely cited as the Achilles' Heel of the XT, and she's starting to complain about it's shortcomings and I'd like to get her a new lens soon.

The two things I know she wants is the ability to do good macro focus stuff (I think that's the right term, sorry if it isn't) and the ability to zoom a little more.

I'm sure those two needs can't be satisfied by one piece of glass, but any suggestions on where a n00b might jump in on one or both of those points? Thanks.
 
How much do you want to spend? The kit lens is okay at best, I give my wife my XT when I upgraded and got her the Canon 10-22. She really loves the ultra wide angle. I love my 24-105 when I was using the XT. Really depends on how much you want to spend and what she is shooting.
 
She just sort of runs around and takes pictures of things. She seems to really enjoy doing close up shots of insects and flowers, and just random still life type objects. Definitely an artistic style, and she's getting quite good (maybe I'll post some of her stuff one of these times). Also lots and lots of family pictures and things, but portrait style stuff seems to do fine with the stock lens.

I know lenses can be really, really expensive, but something under $500-ish would be nice if you can get a good one for that.

Thanks for the response, by the by.
 
She seems to really enjoy doing close up shots of insects and flowers, and just random still life type objects.
Click to expand...

The Canon 60mm f/2.8 Macro is a good lens for this type of shooting
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05021703canon_efs60mmmacro.asp

Also lots and lots of family pictures and things, but portrait style stuff seems to do fine with the stock lens.
Click to expand...
The Canon 17-40f/4 L is a good lens for this. While the kit lens is good, it is not that great. You will be able to see a big difference in IQ. The Tamron 28-75f/2.8 is a good cheap all around lens. Some people might not think it is wide enough for a crop camera such as the XT, but it performs well in low light and has great IQ. Almost "L" like. You can find them for under $300.
 
You might throw in a 50 f/1.8. Alot of people love that lense.
 
I love(well use to) my 50mm, and it cannot be beat for $75. It is great for low light, but does okay as a macro. Once I got my "L" or even my Tamron 17-35, I never used it. Not versatile enough.
 
darktiger said:
The Canon 60mm f/2.8 Macro is a good lens for this type of shooting
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05021703canon_efs60mmmacro.asp


The Canon 17-40f/4 L is a good lens for this. While the kit lens is good, it is not that great. You will be able to see a big difference in IQ. The Tamron 28-75f/2.8 is a good cheap all around lens. Some people might not think it is wide enough for a crop camera such as the XT, but it performs well in low light and has great IQ. Almost "L" like. You can find them for under $300.
Click to expand...

I'd second the 17-40 F/4 L lense also. This was my kit lense replacement basically and the difference has been astounding as far as IQ goes. It will cost you a tad over what you are looking to spend, but it is an excellent lense.
 
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 over the 17-40, it's just as sharp, faster, smaller, lighter, and cheaper.
 
darktiger said:
The Canon 60mm f/2.8 Macro is a good lens for this type of shooting
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05021703canon_efs60mmmacro.asp
Click to expand...
That one is compatible with the Rebel XT right? It only mentioned the high end DSLR Cannons, but I just wanted to confirm my theory that they're compatible across the Cannon line.

Thanks for all the responses. She was wanting to ask some more experienced DSLR people what would be best, so I figured I'd do it myself and surprise her.
 
enlightenedby42 said:
That one is compatible with the Rebel XT right? It only mentioned the high end DSLR Cannons, but I just wanted to confirm my theory that they're compatible across the Cannon line.

Thanks for all the responses. She was wanting to ask some more experienced DSLR people what would be best, so I figured I'd do it myself and surprise her.
Click to expand...

Yes it is compatible.
 
4saken beat me to it, yes it is compatible. The only thing that would not be compatible is if you try to put a ef-s on a ef(full frame) camera....Such as the 5D.
 
fugu said:
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 over the 17-40, it's just as sharp, faster, smaller, lighter, and cheaper.
Click to expand...

I agree, I have the Tamron 17-35mm and it was a awesome lens. But to short for a great walk around lens...
 
Tamron 28-75 F2.8 XR DI for EOS. Best bang for the buck lens on the market.
 
Er, I should probably be googling this, but since everybody is so helpful and friendly as opposed to, say, the console or video card forums, here goes:

What is going to be the pragmatic difference between, say, the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or a Tamron 28-75 F2.8 for example. I know the numbers are focal length or something, but how would those to differ from each other in practical use? What are the pros and cons if the numeric variations?

Hah, I'm going to screw around and become a photo geek myself.
 
They both are great and sharp lens. The 17-50 is wide but not long(effective 27.2-80mm). It would be good to use in taking pictures of architecture and very large groups of people. I find it to short and very limiting. The 28-75 is a great lens, and a lot of wedding photographers use that lens, because of its IQ and price. Some people find it to short because it is really a 44.8mm-120mm lens(1.6 crop factor). But I think it is fine, plus you can take 2-3 steps backward. The 28-75 also makes a good portrait lens IMO.
 
darktiger said:
They both are great and sharp lens. The 17-50 is wide but not long(effective 27.2-80mm). It would be good to use in taking pictures of architecture and very large groups of people. I find it to short and very limiting. The 28-75 is a great lens, and a lot of wedding photographers use that lens, because of its IQ and price. Some people find it to short because it is really a 44.8mm-120mm lens(1.6 crop factor). But I think it is fine, plus you can take 2-3 steps backward. The 28-75 also makes a good portrait lens IMO.
Click to expand...
Sounds like the 28-75 might be the right dude for the job then. I think with that and the Cannon macro discussed above, she (and there fore I :p) will be a happy camper. That should give the ability to do a nice range of things. Thanks again for the help.
 
NP, if you have anymore questions, feel free to post...
 
Im glad this thread came up, I totally forgot about Tamron... I've been looking at Sigmas and Canons..

Hope the lens purchase(s) turn out great, I also second (or third.. not sure how many people said anything) the motion on the cheapy Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens. The day I got it I was amazed just as I was the day I got my first DSLR after playing with a point and shoot for so long. Its an incredible lens for its extremely cheap price!
 
The "Thrifty 50" cannot be beat for the price. While not the best lens for general photography, it does a great job. Check out the Flickr group dedicated to it to see what it can do.
 
I played with my brothers Tamron 17-50 2.8 and found it to be a good lens. Also another option is the Sigma 17-70, I have heard good things about that lens.
 
PanzerBoxb said:
The "Thrifty 50" cannot be beat for the price. While not the best lens for general photography, it does a great job. Check out the Flickr group dedicated to it to see what it can do.
Click to expand...
Wow those really are thrifty. So that would actually serve as a pretty good second lens for a beginner on a budget? IQ is a lot better than the stock kit just glancing at the flikr group. Reading around a bit it seems perfect for outdoor natural light stuff, which is what she's into.

My budget isn't quite as big as it originally was due to our "accidental plasma television purchase" last week...lol.
 
The 50 is nice, but can't replace the kit lens because it's a long focal length on a crop DSLR.

The Canon 35mm f/2 goes for $230ish, and I would consider using that as my only lens.
 
I agree with fugu. Plus she might get tired of switching lens. While I live my 50mm, I rarely use it except for maybe lowlight indoor shots. But the 50mm is a to long for me. I would get 35mm or something wider. If I was into macro I would get the 60mm hands down...
 
I recently bought the Sigma 70-300 APO DG Macro. And I love it!. Around $180. It's big and great for "stalker mode", when you want to shoot something far away. The macro is not "true macro", but fun close ups from far away. I am by no means a pro, but I think it's great for someone starting out new.
 
I'd recommend the 28-135 IS, or 28-105L and a set of Kenko extensions.
 
Ok...things came up and I had to wait a while to buy, but I think I'm about to pull the trigger on the Canon 60mm f/2.8 Macro for her birthday.

Is Amazon a reasonably good place to buy that sort of thing? Quick googling showed it at most major electronics retailers for about the same price.

Also, are the lens hoods a necessity for macro shooting? And this is incredibly noobish..but do new lenses come with caps for protection?
 
enlightenedby42 said:
Ok...things came up and I had to wait a while to buy, but I think I'm about to pull the trigger on the Canon 60mm f/2.8 Macro for her birthday.

Is Amazon a reasonably good place to buy that sort of thing? Quick googling showed it at most major electronics retailers for about the same price.

Also, are the lens hoods a necessity for macro shooting? And this is incredibly noobish..but do new lenses come with caps for protection?
Click to expand...

Depends on the reseller on amazon. Some are sketchy. I would buy from B&H or adorama...
 
darktiger said:
Depends on the reseller on amazon. Some are sketchy. I would buy from B&H or adorama...
Click to expand...
Cool...thanks again for all the pointers. Looking at some of the examples I've found taken with that lens she's going to LOVE it.

Too bad she didn't already have it when she saw a spider bag a fly while on a rose petal the other day...:( The stock kit just didn't do it justice.
 
60mm is way too short for critters. More suited for stamps and coins, etc
 
My 2nd lens purchase was the Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens. GREAT lens but having to "Body Zoom" just gets annoying at times. You lose your wide angle shots with the kit lens.

Plus, I have to say that the kit lens REALLY isn't all that bad. I still shoot with it because it's a basic all around lens. That's why they even made an IS version of the lens.
Here are some of my shots:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/shepscrook/

But I like the Tamron 17-50 F2.8, the Tamron 28-75mm. I know from first hand experience that the Canon 17-40mm is a GREAT lens as seen here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gsaenz/
 
You could also get some extension tubes for those REAL close macro shots....
 
Right on; I have the kenko extensions with pass through electrical; gives you focus/apperture and data; works good. Look for the newer "ef-s" compatible extensions if you get the ef-s lens.
 
Alright...thanks for all the help guys. I ordered the 60mm Canon Macro and it's on the truck for delivery as I type this!

I'll make her take some pictures so I can post them here. :D

I'll probably go for a higher end walkaround zoom type lens for Christmas, so I'm sure I'll revisit this thread and bug you guys about it again.
 
I agree with PS-Rage. I'm sure she'll enjoy the 60mm macro, but it'll be difficult to get close enough to shoot anything that isn't inanimate. My second lens was also the Sigma 70-300 DG APO. It has a macro mode that locks the zoom into 200-300mm and reduces the minimum focusing distance to about 3 feet. Not really true macro, but it reaches 1:2 magnification, which isn't bad for a telephoto. Very handy for things like flowers and animals. You might consider that for Christmas.
 
a side note regarding the extensions, I had to alter the extension tube to fit the ef-s macro, I think the canon extension II fits ef-s, but they might be more spendy than the kenko's; on the kenko's the inside diameter of the plastic shelf? needs to be opened up to right around 1.575" to clear the EF-S lens's rear end.
 
She loves it so far. Here's kind of a cool pic of some cinnamon she took:

experiment034.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top