First Lens for Rebel XT

[anne_dirkse]

Hi All,

 

I bought a Digital Rebel XT a few months back with the kit lens and

have been fairly happy with that so far. I hadn't used an SLR in ages

and thought that it would be a good first lens since its price would

let me buy the camera sooner and get familiar with it before I leave

on vacation (in December). I am still learning a lot of the basics and

find that the lens is sufficient for most of my purposes, but my heart

is really in macro photography and I'm really feeling the limitations

of my current setup there. I've been using the kit lens with a set of

close-up lenses and have had pretty good luck, but much difficulty

also, and I'd really like to get a decent macro lens before I leave.

 

I'll be taking photos in the jungle and would also like to have a bit

more zoom than I currently have to photograph animals and birds, but

my primary focus when shooting is always the detail under my nose.

 

I've been looking at the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM and was

wondering what you all thought of that, and particularly if you would

recommend something different.

 

Thanks for your help and for all of your informative posts. I'm new

and have learned a lot from reading many of these threads.

 

Anne

[ben conover]

A prime lens is not a zoom lens so if you want zoom in the jungle get a zoom lens, not a prime lens. Preferably you might have a high quality fast zoom for jungle work, fast wide prime for dark places, and a prime Macro as you listed above, for tripod work. Macro tends to work better on tripods anywhey. Spelling mistake intentional, got bored.

 

Generally speaking if you spend as much as you can you won't complain, you might also want to buy used from ebay, it's cheaper.

 

I use a remington shaver for the detail under my nose, but I think there are also some waterproof digicams with excellent macro functions you might want to try, good for treking in swamps etc.

 

Cheers and good luck.

[anne_dirkse]

Hi Ben,

 

Thanks for your help. I used the wrong term when I said zoom, I guess I really meant to say longer focal length, sorry. I'm not looking for a zoom lens in particular.

 

Thanks for your advice.

 

Anne

[jimstrutz]

Hard to beat a Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM. It's one of the best 100mm macro lenses out there, and would be a great addition to your kit lens. But be forewarned that once you get used to the optical quality, you may start looking for a replacement of the kit lens.

 

Just kidding. The kit lens is fine when stopped down to f/8, and not terrible wide open. If you aren't making large prints or examining them at 100% on your monitor, you can remain happy. There are certainly better options for more money though, and the Canon macro is one of them.

 

There are less expensive alternatives that do as well, or nearly as well, but the Canon is the only one I know of with a real ring type USM motor, and has FTM. If you ever try to use autofocus with a macro, FTM can be a real asset. If you want to save a bunch of money, the cheap Vivitar/Phoenix/Cosina 100 f/3.5 macro only looks & feels cheap, while optically it's quite good. I recommend it for anyone wanting to experiment with a real macro lens. Since macro is where your heart is, get a good one like the Canon.

[john_mccormack]

You're going to need a LOT more reach and large apertures to shoot animals and birds in a jungle setting. The 100mm macro is a fine lens but won't cut it for long shots. I'd take a look at the new 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 IS USM. See Bob Atkins review of it here:

 

http://bobatkins.photo.net/photography/reviews/ef_70_300is_review.html

 

Or, you might consider the 200mm f/2.8 USM with a teleconverter. I have this lens and it's great - even with a Teleconverter.<div></div>

[jimstrutz]

Ben, I stopped paying attention to the detail under my nose. Same with the detail under my chin. Ever since I started loosing detail on the top of my head (16 years old at the time), my face looked boring and way too long. I had to do something to add visual interest. The last few years I've noticed diagonal lines adding even more optical character, and now leading lines all seem to be direct ones vision to my eyes. I'm becoming a veritable study in macro portraiture. I should rent out my face.<div></div>

[awindsor]

Anne,

 

The 100mm/2.8 macro takes an optional tripod collar (the same one as the 70-200/4) and has a fixed barrel, both of which are advantages over the third party designs. I have a Tamron 90mm macro lens (at least the optical equal of the Canon, several tests rank it as sharper, which wouldn't surprise me given the internal focus design of the "100mm" macro) but I have always felt a little uncertain about hanging a macro ring light of the end of my lens since the barrel extends.

 

However for about $100 more than price of the 100/2.8 macro you can get a 70-200/4. With the addition of a dioptre lens and or and extension tube you will get a pretty good macro lens plus a flexible zoom. John Shaw takes quite a few shots combining a zoom with a dioptre, extension tubes, and/or teleconvertor.

 

Another good option would be the new 70-300/4-5.6 IS. You could combine this with dioptres and/or extension tubes.

 

Handheld macro photography is very possible, and indeed the best macro insect work I have seen is handheld, but you will likely need to use a flash (given the small aperture you need a lot of light if you hope to get a shutter speed fast enough to handhold a macro lens). This entails some form of flash bracket.

 

The good dioptres are the 2 element versions made by Canon or Nikon. The Canon ones are the 250D (+4 dioptre for lenses shorter than 135mm) and 500D (+2 dioptre for lenses 70-300). The Nikon lenses are very popular since they are cheaper. The 5T is a +1.5 dioptre in a 62mm mount and the 6T is a +3 (Nikon say +2.9) dioptre in the same mount. The Nikon lenses are cheaper. Contrary to all you may have read on the EOS forum neither your camera or lens will annihilate with a Nikon dioptre.

 

Hope that helps,

 

Alistair

[jcuknz]

When you get that 300mm zoom remember the rule which says that when hand holding you use a shutter speed equal to the focal length of the lens being used. Since you have a 'crop' factor that 300 is around a 450 equivalent so let 1/500 be your minimum speed at full zoom ... unless you get an image stabilisation version which costs more but lets you use around two stops less, say 1/125. A;ternatively lug a tripod through the jungle.