I have a couple lens's which one is the best to use?

ABCaptures

Ok, I have three lens, all are similar.. I would like to know which one is the best one to use out of the three.

I have

35-80 1:4-5.6

18-55 1:3.5-5.6 II

28-80 1:3.5-5.6 II

Perhaps you can help me figure out how to tell the difference in what they are made to do...
Mind you these came from three different Canon rebels. The Canon Rebel EOS, Canon Rebel 2000 EOS and my Canon Rebel XTi. The first two are not Dslrs, one of them is inoperable but at least i can use the lens's

I also have an external light (snaps into the camera) that i used to use on the rebel eos, I havnt used it on the XTi as of yet.. are there any benefits to using it? What is its purpose when there is an incamera flash?

Tommyboy

ABCaptures wrote:

35-80 1:4-5.6

18-55 1:3.5-5.6 II

28-80 1:3.5-5.6 II

To these sorts of questions, you'll often get the reply, "it depends on what you shoot, what you intend to do, etc. I'd like to be more direct. Dump the other two and keep the 18-55. For the camera you are using (a crop-sensor camera), this is the best range for a "walk-around, on-the-camera lens."

Because your camera is a crop sensor, you must multiply the focal lengths above by 1.6. As a result, the 18-55 is, in fact, a 28-80, more or less. The other two lenses don't offer you any wide-angle capability, though they are stronger telephotos.

Another consideration--a very important one--is the optical quality of the lens. These three are very similar if not identical.

Still another consideration is the maximum aperture of the lens. Again, these three are all but identical.

Try using each of these lenses in a confined space like a bathroom, a car, or similar situation. If you're like me, you'll really appreciate the extra room a wide-angle affords. Add a 70-200 or 70-300 lens and you'll have all the glass that most beginners need to shoots most of the shots they're interested in. As you learn and grow, you'll see the need for more specialized lenses: fast lenses, macro lenses, wider or more telephoto lenses.

An external flash, to answer your other question, if it is a dedicated Canon flash, will provide more light output offering a host of advantages. In addition, if it is a bounce flash (the flash heads tilts up, away from the lens) you can take much better photos by bouncing the light off of a low, light colored ceiling or by using a bounce reflector. If your "light" is not dedicated to the camera you are using, or is, in fact, a light, I would probably abandon it. Ask your local camera store what you've got or look it up online.

Good luck and have fun!

ziggy53

ABCaptures wrote:

Ok, I have three lens, all are similar.. I would like to know which one is the best one to use out of the three.

I have

35-80 1:4-5.6

18-55 1:3.5-5.6 II

28-80 1:3.5-5.6 II

Perhaps you can help me figure out how to tell the difference in what they are made to do...
Mind you these came from three different Canon rebels. The Canon Rebel EOS, Canon Rebel 2000 EOS and my Canon Rebel XTi. The first two are not Dslrs, one of them is inoperable but at least i can use the lens's

I also have an external light (snaps into the camera) that i used to use on the rebel eos, I havnt used it on the XTi as of yet.. are there any benefits to using it? What is its purpose when there is an incamera flash?

Tommyboy is giving you fairly good advice but do try the lenses for yourself and decide which work for your style. For my style and for my usual subjects, the 18-55mm range is typical but I do use f2.8 zoom lenses more often than not.

Do be cautious about older electronic flashes on modern digital cameras. The high trigger voltage of some older flashes can fry the electronics of many modern cameras without appropriate protection.

http://www.botzilla.com/photo/strobeVolts.html

ABCaptures

thank you so much for all the information. I do usually tote around the kit lens and the 75-300mm its just the lens's i like to keep with the camera. the others have been kept in a different camera case always kept at home. I was just curious as to what they were usefull for because i did think the kit lens gave me more options (that were mentained above)

thanks again!

King of Canada

If I were you, I'd sell all 3 of them and upgrade to one lens that is better than all three. I'm not talking about spending lots of cash on a high end lens here, but I do think that you would be a lot happier with your results if you upgraded to soemthing like the new IS version of the canon kit lens, which by all acounts, is a nice (and sharp) little lens.

swintonphoto

King of Canada wrote:

If I were you, I'd sell all 3 of them and upgrade to one lens that is better than all three. I'm not talking about spending lots of cash on a high end lens here, but I do think that you would be a lot happier with your results if you upgraded to soemthing like the new IS version of the canon kit lens, which by all acounts, is a nice (and sharp) little lens.

I agree - I'd sell them all and get the canon 17-55mm 2.8 IS or the sigma 18-50mm 2.8. Or at least the new IS version of the 18-55 3.5-5.6 (It gets good optical reviews)

Photoskipper

other use of those lens
I faced the same problem as you mentioned. I got the EOS 500N with 28-80, 75 -300. When I acquired the 300D (Rebel), they bundled the 18-55.

I used the Sigma 18-200 as on-camera lens and added Tamron 11- 18 later for landscape and fireworks. Used the 75 - 300 rather often for some "tele" shots.

When I got my 5D with 24 -105, 70-200 IS F2.8, those old lens was kept at the deep corner in my dry box.

Learnt from a website about the reversed lens for marco photo. I stacked up 2 lens and took some insect compound eyes, the water droplet, and anything I could get my hands on. It works. The old lens became my mid-night toys in the study room after my family sleep.