I started a thread a few days ago about buying a DSLR. Well I pulled the trigger on a Canon EOS Rebel SL1 DSLR Camera Kit with 18-55mm and 75-300mm Lenses, and now want to know about lenses. From what I've read, the 75-300mm isn't great, but I bought the package because it was a great deal (like $40 more than with only the 18-55). If anything I can sell it and upgrade. Here's two I've been looking at: Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Lens Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 II DC OS HSM Lens for Canon Thoughts on these? Any other budget lens (college student here) suggestions? Thanks for helping!
id get the canon 50mm f/1.8 and save some more money and then get the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 fixed for telephoto and also another one to complete your setup would be a 24-70mm
The 50 f/1.8 is the best $100 lens that you will ever buy. It certainly isn't the best 50mm but for $100 you won't find a better lens. I use mine all of the time. I agree with the above. Start saving and get either the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 or save a little longer and get the Canon 70-200L f/2.8. Both are premium lenses that will last you a lifetime.
I'm confused as to why you need the 50mm when you have the 18-55 I have the 18-55 it's a great lens really clear. Sure it's not a 1.8 but it works great. So does that 70-200. I have an utrasonic 100mm macro lens that I love. If you're into portraits I would consider something like that. Macro is pretty cool too. I recommend sticking to the cannon lenses. They are far superior to the sigmas and phoenix. Just a lot more expensive. I would see if that 70-200 is capable of doubling and if it is get a doubler. Doublers suck compared to a straight 400 or even 600 but way the heck cheaper. Just for fun I'll throw in a simple tech tip not know by most. LCD screens kinda made exposure a lot easier for most but I still think its good to know this one. BDE basic daylight exposure. For shooting in open sunlit areas not an overcast day. Shutter speed = 1/iso @ f16 I typically shoot with the lowest ISO possible With an iso of 100 1/100@f16 will produce perfect exposure in an outside full sun environment.
If you have not shot with a prime lens, then yes, you won't understand why you would want one when your 18-55 covers the 50mm range. Nothing compares to a prime lens. I use my 50mm for all kinds of different photo and video work, even though I have very expensive zoom lenses that cover that focal range as well. And I agree with always shooting the lowest ISO possible. However, depending on your subject at 1/100 you will get motion blur if your subject moves. On the flip side focus is very easy due to the f16. But if your subject moves you will get motion blur most of the time. You will pull more detail however by dropping your f stop, nailing your focus, and increasing your shutter speed ... in most situations ... not all. Every situation is different.
Bde just sets the exposure to the correct place. Depending on subject or depth of field desired this can be adjusted equally on shutter an aperture. A grey card can be used with your reflective light meter in the camera in any and all situations as well. Who uses a grey card anymore. Well I still do. Or I use my incident light meter. And yes I have shot through many premium lenses and they are awesome however both my 18-55 and 45-90 zoom lenses shoot very clear photos. Actually I studied photography for a year at brooks institute of photography in Santa Barbara ca. I did this while film was still mandatory. Very expensive but I learned a ton. I even shot a ton on my horsemen 4x5 as well as medium format. Have you ever out a 1.8 magnifier onto a 600 mm lens. It's awesome.
Yeah the use Ronald regan pulled up and anchored a mile off coast in Santa Barbara. I was able to get detailed face shots of the crew on deck. There was quite a bit of haze shooting over the ocean tho. Clear days are a must for those type of shots. Cool deal tho I wish I owned the set up it was on free check out from the school.
For filming, I highly recommend sticking with the 18-200mm and here is why. When filming deer, you do not get many opportunities to swap lenses. So with a 70-200mm lens, you miss out on wide angle shots. The 50mm prime is really great for interviews and static shots (b-roll footage). Yes the 70-200mm lens is better in lowlight because of the aperture setting is better (2.8 versus 3.5) but again you lose the wide-angle capabilities. To better understand the differences, those numbers are the distance between the lens and the image sensor. So with 18mm the lens is 18mm away from the image sensor therefore allowing more of the scene to be captured (wide angle). Again it comes down to how you are going to use the camera. If you have time to change lenses then sure the 70-200mm is great (I still would go for the 18-200mm). All of my considerations and advice is based on using the DSLR for filming NOT taking still photos. In fact, my Canon 60D is set only for filming. If I want still photos, I use a Sony a55 camera my wife has. In my setup, I followed the recommendations for setting up my Canon from Shane Hulburt, ASC (HDSLR Educational Series for Cinema - Episode 1: Know Your Camera | Hurlbut Visuals) where he walks through all the settings to turn your Canon into a movie camera. He uses the settings on a Canon 5D MkII but many if not all will apply to your camera. I also attended the film school put on by Heartland Bowhunter and walked through how they film (I really like their style) and Skyler films with the 18-200mm most of the time when in tree. But as always, just my opinion.
For video as a hunter, there is no question that that would be a great full range lens. You just have to watch your f stop if you open the aperture at a wide focal length and then go to zoom, because the f stop is going to change and so will your exposure (assuming that everything is full manual mode), but you will have that with any zoom lens that does not have a full range maximum aperture. As long as you take that into account while running your video, then it would be no problem. That is where shooting a ton of video (i.e. practice) comes into play. Do it enough and it becomes second nature. For photo work I'd take the 70-200L f2.8 any day though and make up my shorter focal lengths with either primes or a different zoom lens. Lots of options for sure. One can become "lens poor" very quickly in this hobby. I'm like a crack baby when it comes to cameras and lenses. It is an addiction that my wallet has a hard time keeping up with.
I think I'm going to sell the 75-300mm and upgrade to the Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 as well as the Canon 50mm f/1.8. Thanks all for the help! Camera got here today and I can't wait to get filming.
I've been thinking about playing around with some old FD lenses (particularly a 35-105mm f/3.5 and 70-210mm f/4) using an adapter. You can get them around $40-60 in good condition. Anyone have experience with them on a Canon DSLR?
I got the 50mm f/1.8 and love it, but it's not quite wide enough for interviews in the car, tree, or blind. I'm looking for a wider lens for interviews and other b-roll. Interested in the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8, Canon 28mm f/1.8, and Sigma 30mm f/1.4. Which of these would you recommend?
