Canon EOS Rebel G

[maje_oropel]

I just got my EOS Rebel G from Ebay which I believe is a good beginner's

camera as I read from some threads. Anyway, my problem is that it has a

Quantaray 28-90mm macro lens and as I gathered from the threads this lens is a

low end lens. Can you suggest a canon lens for a beginner like me? How do

you know if the lens has fungus or not? What about flash system, what can you

suggest?

[rainer_t]

It really depends on the budget you have.

 

For a start, the quantaray is likely good enough ... take some time to play with it, until you know better what your needs are.

 

If you want to start with better glass from the beginning, have a look on ...

 

- EF 24-85/3.5-4.5 USM (about 150$/E used)

 

- EF 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM (about 150$/E used) (not the 28-105/4-5.6 !)

 

- EF 28-135/3.5-5.6 IS USM (about 300$/E used)

 

one of these is a solid standard zoom. If you want to spend less than 150$, you can as well stay with the quantaray.

 

Also, the relatively unexpensive EF 50/1.8 (about 80$/E new) is tempting. It's a "normal" lens on a film EOS. Build quality is mediocre, but optical quality is excellent. But it's no zoom.

 

For the fungus check, look thorough the lens from the rear (mount) side carefully. The lens should appear clear ... not as if there is "fog" or "condensed moisture" somewhere.

 

Wait with the flash until you know better what to do with it. For now, the camera has a build in flash, which is of limited use, but it gets you started.

[danield]

Hi Maje

 

The best lens for the moment would be reading and learning about photography, your kit should be sufficient to allow you to learn things. Don't take it for granted that your kit is bad - try it out and see what it does for you. This will make it easier to know what to get later - there's plenty of information on the net.

 

If you want to make a dramatic improvement with a low budget I would recommend several prime lenses - 50mm f/1.8, 28mm f/2.8, 85mm f/1.8 etc. Don't forget that film choice is also important - not all films are the same.

[terry_smith2]

That's a Sigma lens and it is more or less equal to the Canon 28-80/3.5-5.6. That is to say it's not all that good. You'll get better optical performance and build quality plus more flexibility with a Canon 28-105/3.5-4.5. The model II version of this lens sells new for around USD 225 at B&H and used ones are easy to find. If you get one of the earlier versions, make sure it has the word MACRO on the barrel and not a flower symbol. A 50/1.8 would also be great to have so you can use it in low light. About USD 80 new.

[graham_clark]

When I bought my EOS 30 ( Elan 7 to you I think ) I started with a Canon 28-135 IS. Since then I have added a Canon 50 / 1.4, 17-40 and a Sigma 70-200. I did some focus tests once as I was having a problem with the sigma lens and found that in terms of sharpness or whatever phrase you want to use, the 28-135 was the softest. However, back in the real world of taking photos that look good, it does a great job and will stay on the camera most of the time. Incidently, after a rechip from Sigma the 70-200 is a fantastic lens. Shame that after a few hours carrying it around it gets rather heavy, hence it's lack of use!

 

The 17-40, possibly out of your budget is a fun lens. Very useful for narrow streets in European cities and interesting portraits.

 

Don't get sucked into the image stabilising myth. For low light stuff buy one of the 50/1.4 or 1.8 lenses. Use a wide aperture, you can handhold at very slow shutter speeds and get great shots.

 

I use a 420 EX flash. Do a search here for the "EOS flash info / bible". There is some very good info.

 

And as Daniel says, buy good film. Here in the UK you can get Fuji or Kodak pro film very cheaply by mail order.

[smalinowski]

As recommended above, the Canon EF 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 II is a great option to consider. For its price, it is a very decent lens (and very lightweight). Its zoom range makes it quite versatile.

 

To be honest, though, the Canon EF 50 f/1.8 is probably the better choice for "properly" learning photography. It has been said that it is better to learn composition by zooming with your feet.

[maje_oropel]

Thank you so very much. I'm so overwhelmed at your responses and I hope I can come back here often to share ideas with all of you.

[maje_oropel]

How about a canon ef 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5 macro? Would you suggest this as a beginner's lens also? I'm not sure if it has an USM. Feedback please before I make my bid. Thanks...

[rainer_t]

If you go to ...

 

http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/ef/ ... select zoom-3

 

... you find that canon build three versions of a 35-105.

 

There was the 35-105/3.5-4.5 , the two versions of a 35-105/4.5-5.6 one of them with USM the other without.

 

As you see, 'your' version of the 35-105 is the first one, which is a pull-push zoom (I personally don't like that). Also, its not USM and thereby AF will be slower and more noisy. Optically, this lens is likely not even bad, but on the other side, 35mm isn't overly wide on a film SLR. There isn't a big gain over the quantaray you have. I would say ... save the money.