Extras for Amateur With 300D

[shannon_mcgee]

I would classify myself as an amateur who just bought the digital

rebel a couple of months ago and still learning. I only have the

kit lens (18-55) at the moment. I am interested in purchasing more

lenses and an external flash. I have googled and searched this

forum high and low and found lots of useful info, however,I figure

it is best to ask my specific questions. Will mostly be doing

portraits of children in a studio environment. So I'm also

interested in purchasing studio strobe(s). Also may eventually do

some small weddings for friends once I become more comfortable and

confidant. Any advice on equipment choices is greatly appreciated.

[tom_herron]

Shannon,

Here's what I would get based on my own experiences with the 300D...

 

First and foremost...buy a Canon 50mm f1.8 (or 1.4 if you can afford it)....on a digital camera with the 1.6x crop factor, this is an great choice in a portrait lens. They're very inexpensive too.

 

I don't know how soon I would buy studio strobes, I just purchased a set of Alien Bees which I love, but I couldn't live without my 550ex shoe mount flash, Stroboframe flash bracket and off-camera shoe cord, especially for on-location portraits. This set-up would do you well at weddings too.

 

I've never owned the 18-55 kit lens so I can't comment on it. I do have a Canon 24-85 that is my favorite light-weight all-around lens. The quality of the "L" series lenses can be beat, however they're a bit hefty in both weight and price.

[todd.]

I purchased my 300D about a year ago and so far, I love it! I have to completely agree with the recommendation of the Canon 50mm 1.8 (and yes... the 1.4 if you afford it.) I read another article that suggested the 1.8 for the simple reason that it was so inexpensive; it would be a crime to NOT have one. I believe I paid about $80 for mine.

<br><br>

I would stay away from a 75-300 unless you get an IS, in which case they can be quite expensive. At the 300 end of the lens, it is very difficult to hold and unless you are using a tripod, the shot is almost always a bit blurry/shaky.

<br><br>

I also have to second the nomination for the 550ex only on the condition that it is used with an off camera mount. Reason being, it is quite a heavy flash and the 300D having a plastic body makes me a bit uneasy about putting that much weight up there. Along with the 550, a 420ex is a great companion, as you can set it off with the 550.

<br><br>

Although you didn't specifically ask, I highly recommend the Lexar Pro 80x 1GB CF card. I just switched from the IBM Microdrive 1GB to the Lexar and it is not only faster, but there are no moving parts. In real life, I'm a computer guy and I know that moving parts will eventually fail - usually at the most inopportune moment.

<br><br>

Hope this helps!

[shannon_mcgee]

Thanks for the great advice. Just a couple of follow up questions. I know I probably already know the answer to this one but should I buy the 550EX over the Sigma 500 DG Super? I've been told there are similar features but the Sigma costs less. Would either of these flashes suffice for formal wedding portraits or should I get strobes for that purpose? I'm searching for a 50mm now...you convinced me.

Thanks again!!!!

[richard_rowe2]

Well if I could only have one more lens for your camera it would be 28-135mm IS Canon. It will cover most of the range you will need and the long end with the IS will be fine. I would get the Canon Flash. The 28-135 will be great for weddings. Richard

[k._rivkin]

If one thing I learned by asking similar questions is that there is no one who can decide for yourself which lenses you should have.

 

For example for me 28-135 IS is too unsharp, as all non-L lenses in general, with very few exceptions.

 

So I would go for 17-40 and dump 18-55, or would buy Tamron 28-75. But yet again you can have a different set of likes/dislikes.

 

My advise would be buy some, return some, keep some.

[awindsor]

I certainly wouldn't worry about the weight of the 550EX being a problem. If you just

want a single flash then the Sigma is reported to function perfectly. There is a

possible bug in its implementation of Canon's wireless flash system with some people

reporting serious underexposure. You can use several umbrella mounted wireless

flashes in place of a studio strobe which has advantages and disadvantages but would

mean that wireless performance is important

[kin_lau]

The 50mm 1.8 is very good, but just a little long for a general lense, but great for portaits. I picked up a used 28mm 2.8 that's very sharp. The 28 is sharper @ f2.8 than the 18-55 @ f8, so I don't even bother with the 18-55 anymore unless I need the wide. The 35mm f2 is also well recommended, and I would have gotten it if I could even find one locally, but I'll probably wait for my next trip to NYC to pick one up.

 

I've been using my old vivitar 283 flash (check the voltage first) with the 300d, which works just fine... instant replay does make life much easier to get the flash right.

 

My wife & I like to go birding, so the 75-300 (non-IS) has been great. I've had good success shooting it @ 300, even sometimes shooting a 500mm mirror lense handheld, but you just have to practice a bit, and watch the shutter speeds. Again, the instant feedback lets you know what you can and cannot do very quickly.

[ilkka]

The problem with prime lenses on a digital body is that you really should try to get the cropping right in the camera. You start losing megapixels fairly fast if you start cropping in photoshop. It is like using digital zoom, something even beginners know to avoid. Recommending a 50mm normal for studio work is perfectly okay. In studio you can compose peacefully and the old normal lens is certainly cheap and very sharp. But to seriously recommend a beginner who already has a 18-55 zoom to replace it with a stable of fixed focal length lenses...Come on guys!

 

If you are not satisfied with the quality of that 18-55 then by all means get a better lens. By using it for a while you should know whether you mostly need something in the shorter or longer end.

[kin_lau]

Ilkka,

 

4 major advantages of primes with the DReb.

1- much better quality

2- larger aperature, giving control of DOF and low light shooting

3- cheaper than the equivalent zoom.

4- lighter than the equivalent zoom.

 

Cropping is not really a big issue. Zooms can be convenient and good in the right setting, but primes gives you new options. This would be a good time for Shannon to learn.

[prescott carlson]

I prefer the low tech version of cropping by moving closer to my subject. :-)

[ilkka]

Kin,

 

I never thought I would write in defense of zoom lenses...

 

"4 major advantages of primes with the DReb. 1- much better quality"

 

Better quality than the 18-55 yes, I can accept that. But not necessarily any better than a high quality modern zoom lens, like the 24-85 that Tom Herron mentioned he is using. And the 18-55 is no dog either. It is surely good enough for normal use for most people.

 

 

"2- larger aperature, giving control of DOF and low light shooting"

 

Apart from the 1.8/50, which I already agreed is a good addition, the other prime lenses start to get expensive quickly when the speed increases from 2.8 to 2 and 1.4. The difference between 2.8 and the 3.5 that his zoom already has is minimal both in DOF and in low light shooting. The only actual benefit would be the somewhat better quality wide open as agreed in point 1, which really does not make any difference in practice for most people.

 

"3- cheaper than the equivalent zoom."

 

See comment 2 above. Plus he already has the zoom so anything more will be pure additional cost. Or are you suggesting for him to sell the zoom? I wonder what the resale value of that would be.

 

"4- lighter than the equivalent zoom."

 

Not when you need to carry 2-3 primes to cover the same range. And not when the lens he already has is very light (190 g). In comparison, a Canon 2.8/24, for example, weighs 270g.

 

I prefer prime lenses myself. In fact, the only zoom lenses I have are built in ones in a digicam and 35 mm compact camera. What I disagree with is to suggest a newcomer who has bought a good camera with a reasonably good zoom lens to replace that with a selection of prime lenses. I do not believe he would learn anything by doing that, except not to trust opinions given in the internet.

 

Ilkka @ www.sprucefoto.com

[kin_lau]

Hey Ilkka,

 

Shannon said "I am interested in purchasing more lenses and an external flash." The subject is "Extras for Amateur With 300D".

 

I'm answering the "more lenses" question, and you're replying "replacement".

 

I do have a 300D, and this is from experience, so give me a little credit here will 'ya! :). When I say that the difference is noticeable, it's noticeable, even on a 4x6 print. The 18-55 is f4.0 @ 28mm, not f3.5 and the 28mm is f2.8, 1 full stop better and the 18-55 loses another 1/2 stop of light due to the additional complexity (as measured on my 300d), and my 28mm is still sharper @ f2.8 than the 18-55 @ f8. Try shooting in low light a few times, and the advantage becomes clear. @ 35mm, the 18-55 is f4.5, a far cry from f2. @ 50, the 18-55 is f5.6, the 50 is f1.8... no contest.

 

The 24-85 is $450 cdn, my 28 + 50 is the same price total and the 24-85 is not an L class zoom, so the quality is not much better, if any than the 18-55, and you give up the wide angle. For the money, I'd take the quality over convenience, but that choice is for Shannon to make, not you or me.

 

I have nothing against zooms either, I kept my 18-55, it's useful as a carry around lense. My carry around compact is a Canon A70. I have at least 11 zoom lenses (and 50 primes) in the house in different mounts and lengths, some as good as the primes, but the 18-55 is not one of those.

 

My point is, the 18-55 is a good enough general zoom, so to go up in quality, you'd have to get an L class zoom, or primes. Replacing one consumer zoom with another consumer zoom without adding any quality or range at the wide or long end doesn't seem that practical.

 

ps. the only option that adds more flexibilty, is the Sigma 18-125 or the new Canon EF-S 17-85 w/ IS & USM. The Tamron 28-75 also mentioned might be worthwhile since it's 2.8 throughout it's range and is of better quality, but you lose the wide (which might be okay for Shannon).