madhavi_kuram1 Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 Hello I have a canon elan2e and have 28-80/3.5 and a 80-200/4.5,5.6 usm lenses. Iam not totally happy with quality of pictures I get out of it. I want to buy a better lense with a smaller fstops. Looking at the price I can afford only one lens. However my needs are 1) wide angle coverage (for lanscape desserts, forts, islands etc) 2) macro kind of pictures. I know its like aiming for stars but since iam an ameture I can only afford $400 Appreciate a sound suggestion. (even if it means my current lenses are good enough) ;-) Thanks Madhavi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oliver_s. Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 You can't have both (wide angle and macro) for $400 or less. Consider buying used. That said, try to find out which of both is more important for you. Then, get either an EF 100mm f:2.8 Macro or an EF 28mm f:2.8.<p>The former is the predecessor of the current Ef 100mm f:2.8 Macro USM and just a tad worse in in image quality, i.e. it's almost perfect.<br>The latter is simply quite good.<p>Personally, I'd go for the macro lens as details often tell an entire story whereas vistas are often just that--a view. If you really can't decide, throw a coin :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_mathew2 Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 Here is my 2cent.... Option 1. Replace your kit lens (28-80/3.5) with either Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM Autofocus Lens $219.95 @ B&H Canon Normal EF 50mm f/1.8 II Autofocus Lens $69.95 Or Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Image Stabilizer USM Autofocus Lens $399.95 Option 2. Keep your 28-80 and get the following primes! (a). Canon Normal EF 50mm f/1.8 II Autofocus Lens $69.95 (b). Canon Wide Angle EF 24mm f/2.8 Autofocus Lens $279.95 All the best! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fj5 Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 Before you spend hundreds of dollars... Get an EF 50mm f/1.8 II or I prime lens. Read about it at www.photographyreview.com and you'll know why. Sure, it's build is cheap and it doesn't have zoom capabilities but the optical qulaity as well as wider apertures are great to have! PLUS, <$100!!! I use it most often and it deters you from getting lazy with composition. You can't get too close with it for macro but it will blur out the background nicely at wider apertures. As for landscapes, you can get a wider angle prime for better quality but it won't be as cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fj5 Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 George has GREAT suggestions and he included the prices! Option 1 is very attractive (not the OR option though with the IS) but if you want to become a bit more serious, primes might be the better way to go (Option 2)... I wish I could go with option 2 but I can't afford that 24mm just yet. =( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fx Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 Canon 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM + extension tube or Tamron 24-135 + extension tube are viable options as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
continuity Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 Step 1. Buy the 50/1.8 for $70-80<br> Step 2. Shoot some photos and analyze for sharpness & contrast<br> Step 3. Toss your zooms and buy another prime because you can't believe how well an $80 lens can perform.<br> <br> At least that's why I want to do.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_crayg Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 Just a little over $400:50mm Macro "grey" at $23028-105mm 3.5 USM grey at $199 total = $430 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_hum Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 Madhavi, do you already have (and use) a tripod? You will be much more successful with landscape and macro pictures if you do. <p> 1) For your wide angle coverage, this is what I recommend: Using a tripod, set your 28-80 to the 28mm focal length, and set the aperture to f/8. If you have a hood for this lens, use it. Otherwise, try to shade the front of the lens from the sun (unless the sun is in the picture, of course). If you have a cheap filter on the lens, remove it. Take some landscape pictures. The results should be decent. If you're still not happy with the results, then I would suggest buying the 28/2.8, which you can buy new for about US$160. <p> 2) For your macro pictures, I agree with Oliver that the best choice would be to buy one of Canon's 100 f/2.8 Macro lenses. However, if you're on a budget, you might want to consider the Vivitar 100mm f/3.5 Macro. I've never used the lens with an EOS mount, and thus cannot reassure you regarding compatibility (ANYBODY KNOW ABOUT THIS?). But I *have* used the manual Pentax version, and I can recommend its optics. It will definitely be a lot better than a zoom with extension tubes, etc. You can buy one new for about US$150. <p> But definitely, BUY (AND USE) A TRIPOD if you don't already have one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georg_pelosek Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 Hi, I would not suggest the EF 50mm / 1.8 or 1.4(which I use). It provides perfect quality but I use it rarely. This focal distance delivers rather dull results, particularly when you prefer landscape photography. As primes I suggest EF 28mm f/2.8 and EF 85mm f/1.8 USM (perhaps used - not cheap but excellent quality - esp. for portraits). Ozherwise think about the zoom EF 28-105mm USM f/3.5-4.5 which I use for so many occasions. Good price/quality ratio. Take also a look at http://www.canoninfo.com - a new canon site. Ciao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anand_n._vishwamitran Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 50mm f/1.4 USM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
citizensmith1664875108 Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 I'd either go for the 28-105 f/3.4-4.5 and slap a closeup filter on it when you want to try some Macro. Or, a 28 f/2.8 and 50 f/2.5 macro. With the first option, you could definitely send the 28-80 to ebay for a bit of cash back. The second option would give higher quality results, but is closer to the $400 and you may want to keep your current zoom. The only way to get wider is to buy either the 24 f/2.8 or the 24-85 zoom. They are under $400 but neither would fullfill your macro desire. Or, maybe the best option yet. Decide 28 is wide enough, and pop off to your local camera shop and buy a decent quality set of closeup filters for the macro part, then go to a bar and buy some beers with all the left over spending money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_l1 Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 If you're happy with the quality of the pictures you got, you'll be surprised of what cheap prime lenses can do. 1, Get a 28/2.8 and a 50/1.8. They both accept 52mm filters. You can get both for less than $160 on ebay. Then buy some filters. 2, Sell your 28-80 and with your remaining $ get a used 100mm macro. The old non-USM is quite good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melissa_eiselein Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 <p>To get both macro and wide angle shots, you'll need two different lenses.</P> <p>The one lens that I'd recommend for anyone, especially a beginner on a budget is the 50mm f/1.8 mk I or mk II. It's sharp, fast and an all around good lens. Not to mention that you can pick one up for less than $100. Unfortunately, it's neither wide nor macro. You might consider a good, used set of macro lenses to fit, which should hold you over until you can afford the 100 2.8 with macro capabilities.</p> <p>For lens number two, I'd suggest getting rid of your kit lens and replacing it with the Canon 28-135 IS. It's not cheap, but it's way less than a pro lens and it'll give you nice pictures. If you want wider than 28mm, consider the 24mm 2.8. I bought a used one and like it a lot.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canon man Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 If you really must have a zoom there is a used 28-105 3.5/4.5 USMII macro here for 150 bucks in the classifieds. Thereis also a 50mm 1.8 MKI witht the metal lens mount for about 80 bucks. Then you could get a set of extension tubes(KENKO) at adorama for $119 and have a very sharp macro as the 50mm is very sharp lens. I have the 28-105 and for the money it delivers some very good results. with waht is left over you could get a cheap tripod on ebay or one at walMart which would atleats get you started. I say the wal mart tripod because I would ratehr spend available money on good glass and than a tripod. You can always save up a for a tripod at a later date. Hech I got one at goodWill the other day that is awesome for $4. It is lightweight, very stirdy, and has a very fluid head. It was built for a Video Camera which is just fine by me as a use a tripod collar to shoot vertically. So my point is; when I only have $400 to spend and need more than one thing, I go and look around for the best deal I can get and I'm not afraid to buy used. Frugality really pays off, andwhen you have done it for years(in my case a lifetime) you get soem really good stuff for a not as much money. In other words, get the most for your money, and by second hand, not second rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_kuldhardhis Posted February 23, 2003 Share Posted February 23, 2003 you have not uploaded any photos yet. Why dont you upload some. Lets see how bad they have come out !!! :-) George Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madhavi_kuram1 Posted February 24, 2003 Author Share Posted February 24, 2003 Thank you everybody. I think I have a better understanding and clearer picture of what I need to get. seems like28-105 3.5-4.5 USM II and a 50mm 1.8 II is the way to go. Although I would still be inclined to buy a 24mm lens for my travel photography.(I just have to somehow bribe my partner for the $$ ;-) ) Someone asked my if I had a tripod. YES I do....Thanks a bunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abhijit_shah Posted February 24, 2003 Share Posted February 24, 2003 I suppose you already have all the answers. Although I suggest 24mm over 28mm because the extra 4mm makes a big difference in perspective. Not to mention it has exc contrast and sharpness. can be found used around 150$ or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now