topic Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs in EF & RF Lenses

Low budget lenses for amateurs

shumonsaha — Sun, 06 Oct 2013 08:11:17 GMT

Dear Friends

I own a 600 D with 18-135 kit lens.

Recently I was suggested a 50 mm 1.8 in this forum. Big thanks for the tip. Really love this lens.

I want to expand my lens kit without rushing into big spends right now.

Request to recommend 2 more lens that can be really useful for amateur photography.

I have noticed the following

1. Although 50mm 1.8 is good , I find it difficult to us during events like weddings etc where moving closer physically is not an option always.

2. My kit lens 18-135 is good. But with zoom, aperture cant be opened wide. Blurring backgrounds become difficult with this.

3. For outdoor shoot , the kit lens is not good enough as the zoom is too small.

4. Please also recommend for any other occasions that an amateur photographer might need specific lenses and I might not have still figured out.

5. Most important - Want to constrain myself to maximum 2 more additions only to my bag.

6. Budget - Lower the better. A great recommendation eg. was the 50 mm 1.8. Works superb and at extreme low price.

Preferred budget between 150$ to 300 $ for each lens.

*** However, can increase budget if you feel any lens is critical and needs to be added to an amateurs bag.

7. I dont have any particular prefence for canon and open to look at all brands

Hope my query is clear and precise.

thanks in advance for the help

rgds

Suman

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

cicopo — Sun, 06 Oct 2013 14:22:52 GMT

Wide aperture lenses are expensive & in a zoom more expensive yet so I don't think there's any way to fit that budget short of buying a used Tamron 28-75 f2.8. As for longer look at both the Canon 70-300 IS and Tamron 70-300 VC, new or used.

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

shumonsaha — Sun, 06 Oct 2013 15:06:33 GMT

Thank you.will save up and buy. 🙂

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

cicopo — Sun, 06 Oct 2013 15:11:43 GMT

While you're doing that maybe there will be some other good suggestions.

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

ebiggs1 — Sun, 06 Oct 2013 18:29:06 GMT

The real "sleeper" in the Rebel series lenses right now is the SIgma 50-150mm f2.8 EX DC OS HSM.

It is a bit more than your $300 limit but it is a real value. It will rival some of Canon's "L" series and will do it at half the price.

On a Rebel this lens mimics the popular 70-200mm zoom lens range.

Get one, you will not be disappointed.

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

ebiggs1 — Sun, 06 Oct 2013 18:34:19 GMT

Oh, BTW, my standard warning, never buy off-brand lenses "used". Never, never ever!

Unless you are certain of it's history and/or can evaluate on YOUR camera.

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

cuda719 — Sun, 06 Oct 2013 20:34:09 GMT

I was at that point for quite a while and what I did was rent several different lens I liked the Tamron 24-70 f2.8. It has the 2.8 for low light, IS for the people who like that and sealed from moisture and dust. After I purchased that one I sold my kit lens for a decent price saved up some money and bought the Canon 70-200 f4 IS. I still rent lenses all the time to see the advatages of different focal lenghts.

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

shumonsaha — Mon, 07 Oct 2013 07:53:24 GMT

Thank you.but does the 50-150 mm have image stabiliser?

Also what are advantages and disadvantages if I have to make a choice between 50-150 vs 28 to 75 mm as suggested in other post.

Sorry if I am asking basic questions.but need to make a choice and I dont have option of renting a lens here.

Thank you for the reply.

Rgds.

Suman

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

shumonsaha — Mon, 07 Oct 2013 07:58:43 GMT

Thank you for reply.

However renting is not an option in my city.

So am depending on others experience for this

Rgds

Suman

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

ebiggs1 — Mon, 07 Oct 2013 13:34:59 GMT

"Thank you.but does the 50-150 mm have image stabiliser?"

Yes it does. That is what the “OS” refers to in the rather long, cryptic name.

The Tamron 28-75 f2.8 is a nice lens but it is not a great lens. Especially when compared to the Sigma 50-150mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM.

The Tamron is still more in the class of a kit lens, while the Sigma is more of a pro lens. But if the wider end of the focal length range is what you want than the Tamron will be your choice.

In the 50 to 75mm range of either the Sigma is going to be better. But it is going to cost more.

The Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 DI VC USD is a great lens but it's price is getting very high for what it is. For a few more bucks you could get a Canon 24-70mm f2.8 L. And you can easily get a nice used copy for less. I would never buy a 3rd party lens when a real Canon branded lens is available in the same price range. You need to remember, there are more factors to consider than simply optics or price. Of course this is my opinion and others may differ.

Imagine stabilization is not nearly the advantage in wider focal lengths as it is with long focal lengths.

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

cicopo — Mon, 07 Oct 2013 15:00:17 GMT

No offennse but you're now recommending lenses that are 3 to 4 times the budget. There are a lot of very happy photographers using the Tamron 28-75 and it's within the budget. It's more useful to have a lesser lens than no lens at all while you save up for the best in class, and frankly many don't see much difference in the end product in day to day use, especially if they don't print BIG.

May I recommend doing a bit of research here

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=107

Where there are user submitted photos & opinions of just about every lens out there in a Canon EF or EF-S mount.

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

Skirball — Mon, 07 Oct 2013 15:44:13 GMT

@shumonsaha wrote:

6. Budget - Lower the better. Works superb and at extreme low price.

These two variables are, in general, inversely proportional. If they weren't we'd all own the same lens. Getting longer reach with wider apertures requires a lot of glass, so it's expensive, there's not really any way around that. The budget you're working with if very small compared to upper-end equipement budgets, and the general need of "longer, sharper, and faster" is an upper end kind of thing. But besides those "needs", which is kind of a general "need" of everyone, you really seem more like you just want new lenses, not that you have a specific need that your current setup isn't doing.

I would recommend getting a refurbished version of the 55-250mm Mark I from Canon. A new version came out, and although it looks a little better I'd use it to get a cheaper version of the original. Unless you're shooting video, then the STM motor could be helpful. It's fairly cheap, give you some additional reach, and perhaps quench that "need" for new stuff. As far as the bokeh, the nifty fifty is certainly capable of that, do you have to have longer focal lengths for heavy bokeh shots? Can you separate your subject from your background and use the compression of the long lens to mute out your background? The only other cheap option is the 85/1.8, but that's not much extra reach. Prices start heading up with something like the 100/f2, and then they start to skyrocket.

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

ebiggs1 — Mon, 07 Oct 2013 16:54:55 GMT

"... and frankly many don't see much difference in the end product in day to day use, especially if they don't print BIG."

Why is this coming up so much lately. You know or should know better than most, that print size and crop size are mortally bound to each other.

It is quite possible to have a 100% crop printed on a 4x6 print.

I guess you have a point it is better to have something than nothing but where do you draw that line? You could get by, nicely, with a P&S until you could afford a 5D Mk III and a 24-70mm f2.8?

If you consider 'in toto' the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 is a best buy for crop sensors. IMHO, of course, yours may differ.

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

cicopo — Mon, 07 Oct 2013 17:41:17 GMT

Considering that we are talking about shooting at less than 100 mm there shouldn't be a need to crop away very much of the images being shot, so my point is that whatever softness exists between the Tamron & the Canon it won't show in the majority of prints should there even be prints.

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

shumonsaha — Mon, 07 Oct 2013 18:11:22 GMT

Actually I would want slightly more wide lens than a 50. A 50mm effectively translates into a 85 mm for 600 D. Find it difficult to use in small places. Ideal is if I can get something which is 35-105 with a f stop of 2.8. Is anything of similar nature available? I agree that I would go for a canon wherever possible.

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

shumonsaha — Mon, 07 Oct 2013 18:19:49 GMT

At the same time, I know price will be a factor.

so, for now 28-75 mm seems to be my best bet.

Will check out replies and go for it.

Thanks so much for taking time out and helping with the replies.

rgds

Suman

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

cicopo — Mon, 07 Oct 2013 18:40:33 GMT

I happen to have owned both the 28-75 & the 24-70 & have full file samples on line, and they can be downloaded to evaluate but unfortunately they aren't from the same camera nor are they of an identical target. These shots are low res full frame followed by what would be a 100% crop if it displays here at about 600 pixels X 600 pixels. Both samples were shot wide open at f2.8.

Images shot with the Tamron start here & using the Right arrow will advance you through the set.

http://picasaweb.google.com/116179596240613012497/LensSamples#5162930466308872706

And from the 24-70 start here.

http://picasaweb.google.com/116179596240613012497/LensSamples#5169233997188700610

To download an image use the ACTIONS tab & select Download Photo. Photos are unaltered jpg's.

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

ebiggs1 — Tue, 08 Oct 2013 14:32:32 GMT

I have noticed the following

1. Although 50mm 1.8 is good , I find it difficult to us during events like weddings etc where moving closer physically is not an option always.

2. My kit lens 18-135 is good. But with zoom, aperture cant be opened wide. Blurring backgrounds become difficult with this.

3. For outdoor shoot , the kit lens is not good enough as the zoom is too small.

Please also recommend for any other occasions that an amateur photographer might need specific lenses and I might not have still figured out.

Actually I thought the Sigma met most of his requirements but possibly I am in error. I know it is a bit over his requested budget but it seemed to fit the others. And like I mentioned it is a 'best buy' in crop sensor lenses.

The photos you took using the Tamron on your Picasa page are very nice. It shows you don't need high dollar glass to make a good picture. Sometimes lost on me as I tend to shy away from them because they aren't as durable and in my world they would not last very long.

Very nice though and I thank you for showing them.

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

shumonsaha — Tue, 08 Oct 2013 15:24:50 GMT

Dear Skirball,

I finally purchased the 50-250 mm . Got it at a very good price at a store which was selling it seperately from a canon festive combo offer (600d combo offer with 18-55 and 55-250 lens bundled together).

They actually sold the 55-250 at half price than what it is sold seperately.

Thanks for the tip.

Trying out the lens. Feels really good at the price it is being offered even at full price.

rgds

Suman

Re: Low budget lenses for amateurs

Skirball — Tue, 08 Oct 2013 15:38:55 GMT

Glad to hear it, hope you enjoy your new lens. It’s not a professional lens, so don’t expect the world from it, but it’s a nice little zoom at a great price. If there’s enough light then it performs just fine, and the IS is a nice little bonus. For creamy bokeh at that kind of focal length it’s gonna cost. But like I said, if you shoot at 200+ mm, open it up all the way (f/5.6 at that point) and you put a lot of distance between your subject and the background, then you can get decent separation from the lens. But personally I’d just put on the 50mm, set it to F/2, get up close and let the background fall apart.