Choice of Lens

[sacbee]

Hi all,

 

I'm new to SLR photography. I bought EOS-20D with a midrange

18-55mm lens. I want to buy 2 more lenses one a macro & another a

telephoto one. My total budget is around $500 (I really dont know if

its sufficient). Could someone recommend some good lens (Canon or 3rd

Party).

Thanks in advance,

 

Cheers

Sachin

[idoy]

The Canon 100/2.8 USM Macro is both a macro and a telephoto, and is under $500. It's also said to be an excellent lens.

[bennyboy]

EF-S 60 f/2.8 USM Macro is exceptionally good for macro, does 1:1, and takes very crisp portrait shots to boot. It's probably at the upper end of your budget and won't provide the mid tele that the 100 f/2.8 will.

 

The sigma 70-200 f/2.8 is also exceptionally good but again this will blow your budget.

 

I think the question here is are you prepared to settle for lower quality or slower lenses to try and accomodate your requirements within budget?

 

You may be able to get a Canon 50/2.5 and 70-200 f/4 if you shop around/buy 2nd hand, they'll be considerly closer to 500 than my other suggestions (but not that close), you'll sacrifice speed in the tele (but gain because it's lighter), and not achieve 1:1 focusing on the macro.

 

It would be useful if you could post what you are intending to use the macro and tele to shoot (if you've decided - I know I still haven't).

[yakim_peled1]

<P> If I were in the market for a dedicated macro lens, I'd get the Tamron 180/3.5 for it's build and optical quality, for it's long working distance (the longest of <b>all</b> lenses), for it's reasonable price (only 200$ more than the Canon 100/2.8 macro USM), for it's <a href="http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html#rearinternal">IF</a> and for <a href="http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html#compatibilitythirdparty">Tamron's excellent compatibility reputation</a>. It can also double as a telephoto lens. </P>

<P>If the added 200$ are out of your reach then I'd recommend the Canon 100/2.8 macro USM.</P>

 

<P>HTH.</P>

 

<P> Happy shooting , <br>

Yakim. </P>

[mark u]

$500 is not really a large enough budget if you want to get top quality lenses covering both these needs. It will suffice for the macro lens, but even on its own it will leave you short for a telephoto of better quality. Others have suggested some macro alternatives designed to blow your budget (and more than blow it for the telephoto), so I'll try to stay within budget for my recommendations.

 

Fortunately, it's much easier to make a good macro lens than a good telephoto, so you could get the Cosina 100mm f/3.5 macro (also sold as Phoenix and Vivitar) - this would be quite a bit better than your 18-55, though not quite as good as some of the other suggestions. However, it would leave you with enough to meet the budget and get the Sigma 70-300 f/4-5.6 APO DG Macro (note the full description - there are other versions of this lens that are not as good) which offers the best optical quality in a telephoto without stepping up into the $500+ class lenses. Whilst it doesn't compete with the Cosina for macro quality, and only goes to half life size magnification, you might even find it is adequate for the purpose until you are able to devote more funds to your lenses.

[athinkle]

Look at the Canon 100 2.8 macro and the sigma 105 macro. The 70-300 APO DG macro zoom is also a good call but like the previous poster said make sure to get that exact version. There's an APO and a regular version. The APO is great, the non-APO is well, not so great.

[bsd230]

I would buy the Sigma 24-70 2.8 EX Macro and the Sigma 70-300 apo DG Macro that goes a little over your budget by abut 120 bucks but it would be a nice combo. I have the 24-70 and I love it. If you decide on the 24-70 make sure its the Macro version.

[pbizarro]

I would recommend to know your current lens and develop your style of photographing before embarking in spending money. After learning and practicing a lot, you will have a better idea of what you want.