lens question from anonymous

Andy

anonymous wrote:

hey Andy I was wondering if you can give me some advice on a lense dilima. I need to find a lense for a Dig Reb that I can use in low light, pref. f/2.8, but I have to keep it a little on the low $ end so L's are out of the question. If you could point me in the right direction I would be happy- already went to ebay. Thanks alot (name withheld)

you don't say, prime or zoom, so i'm going assume, zoom. here are a couple, i don't have experience with them, but i know that folks here on dgrin do, and i'm sure people will chime in with their thoughts.

tammy 28-75

sigma 28-70

two other excellent, non-L choices are, imo, the canon 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8. both under $300 and both outstanding values.

morrisphotography2003

i was looking at both of them but wasnt sure what way to go but i can get a better deal on the sigma so i think that i will go for it. Thank you for your input. Bob

andy wrote:

you don't say, prime or zoom, so i'm going assume, zoom. here are a couple, i don't have experience with them, but i know that folks here on dgrin do, and i'm sure people will chime in with their thoughts.

tammy 28-75

sigma 28-70

two other excellent, non-L choices are, imo, the canon 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8. both under $300 and both outstanding values.

Khaos

I second the 50 and 85 suggestions. The 50 might probably be best in using your feet to adjust the FOV.

I had the Tamron. It's a good lens. My issue was that it focus hunted more than I liked in low light.

HeldDown

I'm going to throw my hat in for the Canon 50mm 1.8 Mark II. I paid $100 Canadian, and it was the best money I ever spent. I think everyone needs to own this lens.

colourbox

HeldDown wrote:

I'm going to throw my hat in for the Canon 50mm 1.8 Mark II. I paid $100 Canadian, and it was the best money I ever spent. I think everyone needs to own this lens.

I gotta agree. I keep saying to myself "I paid USD$75 for this lens...WOW!"

jmathew

lens

colourbox wrote:

I gotta agree. I keep saying to myself "I paid USD$75 for this lens...WOW!"

I keep saying "why did I sell it?"

I'm going to end up buying it again I know. Its a fantastic lens esp. for the money.

I've got the Tamron as well and LOVE it. Its become my walkaround lens.

tom e

Sigma 30mm 1.4 is very nice on this camera.

Andy

tom e wrote:

Sigma 30mm 1.4 is very nice on this camera.

yes, that lens really looks like a winner. and, on a 1.6x body, mmm mmm that's tasty

pathfinder

andy wrote:

you don't say, prime or zoom, so i'm going assume, zoom. here are a couple, i don't have experience with them, but i know that folks here on dgrin do, and i'm sure people will chime in with their thoughts.

tammy 28-75

sigma 28-70

two other excellent, non-L choices are, imo, the canon 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8. both under $300 and both outstanding values.

I can also highly rec the Canon 50mm f1.8 and the 85mm f1.8 and the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 Di - all are excellent optics. I have useds all three for many images I have posted here on dgrin.

The primes are slightly sharper than the zoom, as would be expected. But I have lovely 13x19 in prints made with the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 Di lens and a Canon 10D body.

ian408

Andy mentioned the 50 to me and I think it's a real winner as is the 85.

Ian

mojones

Another prime suggestion; I love the canon 28 f2.8 on my Digital Rebel (~45mm in full-frame terms). Only very slightly bigger and heavier than the 50 f1.8 and I really like the field of view - the 50mm seems too tight a crop for general use (IMO). About £160 new in the UK.

gus

50mm f/1.8. All $70 worth of it.

Cheap as chips

Chase

50mm f1.8. But I also love my sigma 24-70 f2.8.

My 85 f1.8 is coming in the mail as soon as dell ships it (got it for 292 though, might have to wait until the end of october to get it.) I have high hopes.:D

SnapHappy

Chase wrote:

50mm f1.8. But I also love my sigma 24-70 f2.8.

My 85 f1.8 is coming in the mail as soon as dell ships it (got it for 292 though, might have to wait until the end of october to get it.) I have high hopes.:D

Got the 24-70 as my first lens and still is. Too inexperienced to offer any real image opinion but have to say the zoom makes a lot of noise and it's fairly heavy but apart from that I'm happy with it so far, good value.
Would also add the only real disappointment with this purchase is the 'macro' label, not what I would expect of 'macro' but again I am fairly new to it all but I've come to understand that the term is loosely used in marketing.
A slightly pessimistic view but I'm happy with it.

Reading this thread is only re-confirming my next choice of glass to be the 50mm f/1.8.

Chase

SnapHappy wrote:

Got the 24-70 as my first lens and still is. Too inexperienced to offer any real image opinion but have to say the zoom makes a lot of noise and it's fairly heavy but apart from that I'm happy with it so far, good value.
Would also add the only real disappointment with this purchase is the 'macro' label, not what I would expect of 'macro' but again I am fairly new to it all but I've come to understand that the term is loosely used in marketing.
A slightly pessimistic view but I'm happy with it.

Reading this thread is only re-confirming my next choice of glass to be the 50mm f/1.8.

The AF is a bit buzzy, but it is a pretty nice "close focus" lens, though not near a true macro.

50mm f1.8 is a no brainer. It is pretty handy to throw in the bag for unknown lighting conditions, cause you will be in good shape 90% of the time with it(and a flash solves the rest). It also takes up practically no space and weight. I got mine for 65 dollars to boot.