Is this a bad lens kit?

[ryanjoseph]

EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

 

EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM

 

Vivitar/Phoenix 100mm f3.5 Macro

 

 

I think this is a fairly solid lineup of lenses, of course they are

not L level. However if anybody thinks I can improve on this lineup

without blowing my budget of 1500 dollars with a body and 3 lenses Id

love to know. TIA

 

PS: These lenses are for a Canon EOS 300D

[gwilburn]

In place of the EF 55-200mm, I'd substitute the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO Macro II. In the same price range but more versatile and has been getting good user feedback on the 300D forum on dpreview.com (lots of uploaded samples to look at there).

[yakim_peled1]

<P>Buying a good body and bad lenses is a photographically <a href="http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html#whichdigitallens">a very silly move</a>. It's like buying a good stereo system and mate it a pair of lousy speakers. A simple waste of money.</P>

 

<P> For 1500$ you can have 300D + 28/2.8 + 50/1.8 + 135/2.8. No zoom versatility and narrower focal length range but after seeing the first pictures you will probably forget all about it. </P>

 

 

<P> Happy shooting , <br>

Yakim. </P>

[john_burnham]

First of all... it depends on what you are shooting. If you feel you need the versatility of a zoom and will accept the loss in image quality (both sharpness, speed, and overall look ie bokeh) then go with the zooms. But if you are after strong, beautiful images go with fixed lenses. Canon offers a great line up and somewhat affordable. The 20 2.8, the 50 1.8 (1.4 is better but you can't beat the 80 bucks for the still veyr nice 1.8), too get that longer range it becomes personal tastes and size of wallet and might lead you to a zoom (EF 80-200) but you will notice the quality difference the second you use it! Stick with the 100 3.5! Now, with the high quality fixed lenses you will get far better results and they will force you to work with the one POV which will improve your shots.

 

Best of Luck and GO CANON! :-)

[mark u]

I agree with Gene about the Sigma 70-300 f/4-5.6 APO Macro Super II - better optically than any of Canon's 75-300 lenses, though not as fast focussing as a Canon USM lens. That will also give you half life size macro capability at the long end (good for butterflies). For a true macro lens, if you can't quite run to Canon's excellent 100mm f/2.8 (look for it secondhand to lower your cost a little), then I'd look at Tamron's 90mm macro, or the Sigma 105mm macro, both of which are also very good lenses.

 

It's always worth adding in Canon's 50mm f/1.8 as this is a very sharp lens that will give you some low light capability and it's available for under $70 new. It's a great portrait lens on the 300D.

[andrew robertson]

As a previous owner of the Sigma 70-300 mentioned above, let me give some words

of caution about that lens.

 

1. The zoom creeps like crazy at even moderate angles.

 

2. It's a pretty delicate lens. Held together with tape (TAPE?? Yes, TAPE!!!) inside,

mine became unreliable within two weeks. I would get this 'snnnick' noise and be

able to see the tape overhanging some of the elements in the lens when focusing

about 1/2 the time.

[richard thompson www.fotoz]

Before considering the Sigma 70-300, check it will work on the 300D - I tried one out on my 10D and it gave the incompatibility error err99. I thought the Tamron 70-300 LD 1:2 was sharper...

<br><br>

I've just bought the Tamron 90mm Macro 1:1 and it Rocks. Tests I'd read said it was nearly as good as the Canon 100mm f2.8, and I believe them. On a 300D, it works well as a 144mm prime also.

<br><br>

Then either take Yakims advice and get a wide prime and a 50mm 1.8 or the 18-55 efs and a 50mm f1.8.

[noah_s]

If you need a zoom, try the Canon 24-85, 28-135 IS or 28-105 (3.5-4.5, NOT the 4.5-5.6). Save the rest of your money. After using one of these lens for a while, you will have a better feel for what focal length you would like to add. No need to blow all your money at once.

[gwilburn]

The Sigma 70-300 f/4-5.6 APO Macro Super II works fine on the 300D and 10D. Two descriptors to watch for: 'APO' and 'II'. There's a cheaper Sigma 70-300 that this lens gets confused with. It's the APO model you want. The APO II has a red ring near the front of the lens. The older, non-compatible APO had a yellow ring.

[ryanjoseph]

Sorry guys maybe I'm not very clear on my needs, but the advice has been great. The reason I am going for the kit EF-S lens and not the 24-85 /f3.5-4.5 is because that lens on the 300D is simply not wide enough. However if it is that much better, I am willing to sacrifice the consumer telephoto and EF-S kit lens to buy that lens. I guess I could save my money and buy a better telephoto in a year or so (not many EOS users I can bum a lens off of in the meantime. Ok how is this for a revised kit?

 

EF 24-85 F3.5-4.5 USM

 

Phoenix 100mm f3.5 Macro

 

And maybe in a year or so I could add this.

 

Canon 80-200 f4 L

 

How does this plan sound guys?

 

TIA

[quentin_smith]

the 24-85 is a great lense that never comes off my camera but may not be wide enough for the 300d

i would still get the kit lens because it is the most economical way to get wide angle on that camera. (although still not super wide) and it is NOT available without the camera.

 

if you get the 24-85 get the 75 to 300 instead of the 55-200. or try the 100-300 which is better quality.

 

i have done some macro work on a budget with Diopters (not great but ok)

 

have fun

[yakim_peled1]

>> Canon 80-200 f4 L

 

There is no such lens. There was an old Canon 80-200/2.8 L (non-USM) and there is a new 70-200/4 USM L.

[claus_weber]

What you need to decide is what is more important to you, telephoto or wide angle. Here's my input for what it's worth:

 

Wide Angle Kit:

300D w/o kit lens $900 +

20 f2.8 $390 +

28 f2.8 $155 +

50 f1.8 $70

Total = $1514

 

Telephoto:

300D w/o kit lens $900 +

70-200L f4 $580 +

50 f1.8 $70

Total = $1550

 

Both are a tiny bit above your budged but in the end it'll be worth it. Add the other end later when you can.

[basscheffers]

I am getting a 300D and am getting the 18-55. But the only reason I am getting it is the wide angle. I am pretty sure my prime lenses will be on it most of the time, only resorting to the 18-55 when 1) I need the wide angle or 2) I need/want to travel light.

 

By all means, get the lens as it is only $100, but don't rely on it as your main lens.