Suggestion of the following EOS digital system.

[eyadnalsamman]

As a friendly suggestion, what do you recommend on the following equipment for

a beginner photographer in the field of digital photography? What other wide-

angle lenses could fit on the specified DSLR for getting better landscape

photos? What about the adaptability of the corresponding AF mounts of lenses

on the specified DSLR?

 

The digital equipments are:

1- DSLR: Canon Digital Rebel XTi (400D) ($750-800 US)

 

2- Wide-angle zoom lens: 18-50 mm F3.5-5.6 DC (MSRP: $180 USD at

www.sigmaphoto.com)

Or: 24-70mm F3.5-5.6 ASPHERICAL HF (MSRP: $180 USD at www.sigmaphoto.com)

 

3- Standard zoom lens: 28-105mm F3.8-5.6 UC-III ASPHERICAL IF (MSRP: $160 USD

at www.sigmaphoto.com)

 

4- Telephoto zoom and Macro lens: 70-300 mm F4-5.6 DG MACRO (MSRP: $200 USD at

www.sigmaphoto.com)

 

The general purposes for the whole system is getting photos of landscape,

portraits, architecture and macro.

 

Thank you for your help.

[mars c]

My suggestion is to buy the Canon 17-85 IS USM first and the Canon 70-300 IS USM later as finance would allow.

 

Buying those cheap alternative lens would be just a waste of money if you're not satisfied with them and upgrade later, with the lens I mentioned, you'll have great range and the IS.

 

The lens that start at 24 0r 28mm are not wide enough for the xti, so avoid them, as a beginner.

[mars c]

BTW, for macro, you either need a close up lens or a dedicated macro lens.

[william_fong]

I would suggest Sigma's EX DC HSM line.

 

I have the Sigma 30mm EX DC HSM. Great prime.

 

I should be getting my Sigma 10-20mm EX DC HSM tomorrow.

 

I'm planning on getting the Sigma 50-150 EX DC HSM soon.

 

Sigma's "EX" is their "professional" line. From what I've seen, works great. I want to shy away from the Canon "L" series until I get a better camera, like the 5D, or my XL2...

[william_fong]

Forgot to mention, don't look at Sigmaphoto.com's MSRP price. They are high. B&H has them for much lower.

[michael_madio]

The potential problem with those lenses is that they are all slow with a f/5.6 maximum aperture at the long end which means you will be shooting at f/8 to f/11 for best performance and even then, some may not deliver the results you want. This is very subjective so I'm not saying they won't work for you, just giving my $0.02.

 

Possibly consider the 35/2 as your standard lens, 50/1.8 for moderate telephoto, and 20/2.8 for moderate wide-angle. If you want macro capabilities, consider extension tubes as you can use them behind any of your lenses. Add lenses in either direction as your needs dictate. You will also want to budget for a good tripod, wired remote, and flash.

[John Crowe]

Canon 18-55 kit lens, Canon EF 50/1.8, and a used Canon EF 70-210mm f3.5-4.5 USM.

 

 

For a beginner photographer you do not want to be spending the huge bucks required for IS. You're better off with used Canon lenses than bottom of the barrel third party lenses. Good luck.

[mark u]

If I'm adding up your lens budget correctly it's $540. I would ignore 3. as not being a useful range on a 1.6 crop camera. 2b) is a good low budget choice on a film camera but less suited to a 400D, and 2a) is only very marginally better than Canon's 18-55 kit lens.

 

4. is a good choice if you really need that range (I'm not sure you really do for your subjects) and can't afford the big step in price to the excellent Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM (it's a much better choice that the Canon 75-300 lenses).

 

Instead, I'd consider the Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 (about $390) which offers good close focus capability across the range and a useful range of focal lengths and the Canon 50mm f/1.8 (about $80) for portrait and low light work. An alternative is the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (about $440), although it doesn't offer as close focus.

 

The point is that I suspect you may find you want to add different lenses as you gain experience and can afford them. For example, you might want to consider the Tokina 12-24 or Sigma 10-20 or Canon 10-22 to give some wider shots for landscape and architecture. You might also want a true macro lens that will focus down to life size. In the mean time, you might as well get something that is a useful step up from the "cheapie" lenses that will stand in good stead for the future and give you some coverage of your interests while you explore your new camera.

[robert lee]

Eyad,

 

I recommend that you don't go cheap on the optics. Specifically don't go wild accumulating a bunch mediocre lenses. I can speak from personal experience that you won't be happy with them.

 

Buy the camera with the kit zoom. For a $100 premium over body only, it's a good deal. Use it on a tripod and stopped down to f8 or f11. This will give you technically sharp images for landscapes and such.

 

Spend another $70 for the 50mm f1.8. This makes for an excellent short and fast telephoto on the crop body. Use it opened up to f2.8 or wider to get that nicely blurred background for portraits.

 

Get to really know the equipment in context: composition, lighting, digital darkroom methods, etc. You'll know by then what, if any additional equipment you need.

 

Finally, if you really, really want to spend money now:

 

1. Get the 17-40 f4L, and stop.

 

2. Or, get the 35mm f2.0, 50mm f1.8, and 85mm f1.8, and stop.

[eyadnalsamman]

Thank you all for your kind and helpful comments.

 

I am not sure if you mean by the term IS the Image Stabilization at the lens itself.

 

What will be the main differences when you get your photo by a dedicated MACRO lens and the same shot by using EXTENSION TUBES?

 

Now, I am satisfied to take into my consideration the following equipments:

1) Canon 50mm f1.8 lens ($80) since most of you recommended it but I cannot understand how it could work as a telephoto lens with only a 50mm focal length? It seems to me a standard lens used for portrait and general photography.

 

2) I am also satisfied with the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 ($390) for a wide-angle zoom lens. There is a note regarding this lens (Not compatible with 35mm or digital cameras with larger image sensor than APS-C size), what about the image sensor of the XTi ?

 

3) For the telephoto, Sigma 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DG Macro Autofocus Lens ($280)

 

Thank for all replies and for your kind recommendations.

[robert lee]

"Canon 50mm f1.8 lens ($80) since most of you recommended it but I cannot understand how it could work as a telephoto lens with only a 50mm focal length?"

 

The sensor in the XTi is smaller than the 35mm frame that the lens was originally designed for. Basically, the image is cropped.

 

Here's another way to think about this. Say you shoot a bunch of pictures with the 50mm lens mounted to a film camera. When you get the prints back, cut away about 15% of the picture from all four sides. That's the framing you would have gotten had the images been captured on the XTi (or any other 1.6x crop digital body for that matter) originally.

 

"...this lens (Not compatible with 35mm or digital cameras with larger image sensor than APS-C size)..."

 

Higher end Canon bodies, from the 5D on up, tend to use 35mm sized sensors. The 30D, XTi, etc. all use the less expensive APS-C sized imager. Don't get EF-S lens like this is you intend also to use it on a full frame or film body, now or later.

 

"For the telephoto, Sigma 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3"

 

There're two issues here. First, to get this kind of zoom range means inevitable optical compromises. Try it before you buy it (or at least make sure it can be returned without penality.)

 

Second, the lens is slow (i.e., dark.) It may not provide enough light for the camera to autofocus in all but very bright conditions. Also, the lens is very dark at the telephoto end. You'll probably have to stop it down further to f11 or f16 to get adequate sharpness; forget about hand holding the lens in all but high noon.

[steve_spencer2]

Hi Eyad,

I am in much the same position--just starting out. Here is what I went with. I got a

rebel XT instead of a Rebel XTi. I was able to get a refurbished one for $400. I didn't get

the kit lens. I got a 50mm f/1.8 (80mm film equivalent) $70, a 17-40mm f/4L (27-64mm

film equivalent) $575, and a 28-70mm f/3.5-4.5 (45-112mm film equivalent) $90. All are

Canon lenses. I also got a good tripod, a bogen-manfrotto 3001BN with a 486 ball head,

$125. So all in all, I spent about the same as you are looking at or about $100 less.

I don't have everything I want yet. I am also going to get the 85mm f/1.8 (136mm film

equivalent), the 100mm f/2.8 Macro (160mm film equivalent), and the 70mm-200mm f/

4L (112mm-320mm film equivalent) when I can afford them. These will cost about $1,250

more. I am getting two types of lenses at this point. Very inexpensive ones that still are

rated as having very good image quality, but they are cheap because they have poor

builds. I am also getting lenses with very good build quality and excellent image quality,

but are not astronomically expensive. I am purposely staying away from the consumer

level models and Non-Canon brands that are intermediate in cost and intermediate in

terms of build and image quality. It seems to me that these intermediate lens aren't cheap

enough to not worry about their cost in the long run and not good enough that you can

really use them in the long run. In addition, you have to put up with poor image quality

now, but to each his own. I am not saying all Non-Canon lenses are bad, the macros are

often fine and some in the 17-50 range with low apertures get good ratings, but I think in

the long run the Canons will hold their value better.

Notice that I also mention what I call the film equivalent of all the lenses listed above.

That is because on the Rebels, the 10D, 20D, & 30D, but not the 5D, the range of lenses

need to be adjusted for the size of their sensors. Traditionally, 50mm on 35mm film

cameras was considered a normal lenses (i.e., what your eyes see). Less than 50mm was

considered wide angle and greater than 50mm was considered telephoto--of course as

you get a real short focal lengths you can call it ultra wide angle and as you get a very long

focal lengths you can call it supertelephoto. This means to understand how your lenses

will actually work on your Rebel XTi you will have to compute the film equivalent as I have

called it. Just multiply the focal length of the lens by 1.6, so a 50mm lens will work on

Rebel XTi like an 80mm lens on a film camera (i.e., like a short telephoto lens and not like

a normal lens).

Let me suggest these resources to research lenses and make purchases:

 

Lens reviews both user surveys and technical evaluations

 

www.photozone.de

www.photodo.com

www.lensplay.com

 

 

lens reviews technical evaluations

 

www.the_digital_picture.com

photonet here has evaluations as well

www.bobatkins.com

www.phototestcenter.com

www.luminous-landscape.com

 

lens review user survey

 

www.fredmiranda.com

 

Places to buy on-line new and used with good ratings

 

B & H photo: www.bhphoto.com

Adorama photo: www.adorama.com

KEH photo: www.keh.com

 

I hope this helps

 

--Steve Spencer