"Decent" enough lens for 300D?

[Daniel Nielson]

Hi all,

As the thread title says.

It seems that the kit lens is generally considered as crappy in image quality, so I am thinking on what other lenses can I get. I know the easy answer is the L series lenses, but I don't think I can effort one any time soon.

I know the 50 mm prime F1.8 is not bad in terms of sharpness, and cheap too.

What will be your recommendation for:

- wide prime lens
- general purpose zoom lens

Would I be right to say that most prosumer cam at lowest iso setting is better than 300D+kit lens in term of image quality?

I am thinking that if I can't get something decent enough within my budget it would be better off for me to use a light and small prosumer cam than to torture myself with the weight of dSLR lenses.

Thanks guys.

[ray_stinger]

Sigma 18-125
Sigma 20mm

[Daniel Nielson]

Thanks, how much would they cost?

[Daniel Nielson]

Btw, are Sigma DC lenses good in term of sharpness?

Thanks.

[varf]

Originally Posted by Daniel Nielson Would I be right to say that most prosumer cam at lowest iso setting is better than 300D+kit lens in term of image quality? I am thinking that if I can't get something decent enough within my budget it would be better off for me to use a light and small prosumer cam than to torture myself with the weight of dSLR lenses. Thanks guys.

really depends what you're looking for. most con/prosumer cams are rigged to give you nice images out of the box - moderate saturation and sharpening applied. and while the 300D kit lens is fairly soft at most apertures, stopped down (as with most lenses) it produces decent images for 4R prints and lower-res web images which you'd need to sharpen after resizing anyway.

took this shot recently with an Ixus 400 digital compact:

(larger)

could i have taken the same shot with my 300D? perhaps, but i wasn't carrying it with me. the compact, however, was handy at the time. how much does portability mean to you?

[obewan]

Originally Posted by Daniel Nielson Hi all, As the thread title says. It seems that the kit lens is generally considered as crappy in image quality, so I am thinking on what other lenses can I get. I know the easy answer is the L series lenses, but I don't think I can effort one any time soon. I know the 50 mm prime F1.8 is not bad in terms of sharpness, and cheap too. What will be your recommendation for: - wide prime lens - general purpose zoom lens Would I be right to say that most prosumer cam at lowest iso setting is better than 300D+kit lens in term of image quality? I am thinking that if I can't get something decent enough within my budget it would be better off for me to use a light and small prosumer cam than to torture myself with the weight of dSLR lenses. Thanks guys.

Hmmh... Is again the "Man or Machine" qns...
I personally, have this question in my mind too. Shld I get a prosumer cam or should I get a budget DSLR like a Canon 300D???

Prosumer cam price is attractive & will satisfy most of my needs. It is also smaller and lighter. Major disadvantage is you will find it more and more limited as your experience and skill in photography improve and you want more features and flexibility.

DSLR major advantage is its flexibility and able to change to different lenses
for different occasion. But it will be v costly, and you will hv the urge to upgrade all the time. Bad if you really have a tight budget.

After reading many threads, I still agree that it is the man behind the machine that counts....
So the final decision is still up to u.

[lwy]

Originally Posted by Daniel Nielson Would I be right to say that most prosumer cam at lowest iso setting is better than 300D+kit lens in term of image quality?

It is never fair to compare the lowest iso setting because lowest iso for most prosumer cam is at iso50 and 300D is at iso100. You are just like comparing a normal saloon car and a luxurious 4wd stating that the saloon outperform the 4wd in speed on normal road on first gear. Likewise the highest iso of the 300D is at iso 1600 and most prosumer camera has lower than iso 800. Why not compare them in the highest iso setting in terms of image quality?

As for a decent lens range, recommend the tamron 17-35 f2.8-4 and tamron 28-75 f2.8. Both are sharp lenses and you will not sell them unless tempted by the L...

[plinius]

for the price of the kit lens, IMHO I would not consider it as crappy, it served me well.....

read this http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/efs18-55/

and decide for urself.....

Cheers........

Originally Posted by Daniel Nielson Hi all, As the thread title says. It seems that the kit lens is generally considered as crappy in image quality, so I am thinking on what other lenses can I get. I know the easy answer is the L series lenses, but I don't think I can effort one any time soon. I know the 50 mm prime F1.8 is not bad in terms of sharpness, and cheap too. What will be your recommendation for: - wide prime lens - general purpose zoom lens Would I be right to say that most prosumer cam at lowest iso setting is better than 300D+kit lens in term of image quality? I am thinking that if I can't get something decent enough within my budget it would be better off for me to use a light and small prosumer cam than to torture myself with the weight of dSLR lenses. Thanks guys.

[jsbn]

Out of the kit lens, I'd gotten pretty decent photos out of it.

But till the day cometh where I can afford da 17-40 f/4L or the 16-35 f/4L, I'll stick to the kit lens for my wide-angle shots.

I wun say its 'plastic fantastic'. But it'll give u decent enuff shots unless u're a serious nitpicker.

[majere2sg]

Can consider the Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 DI

[Zplus]

Wide prime lens - EF24mm
General Purpose Zoom lens - Kit lens

Would I be right to say that most prosumer cam at lowest iso setting is better than 300D+kit lens in term of image quality?

Depends on what you mean by image quality... the 300D + Kit lens at iso100 (lowest setting) would be less noisey then any prosumer cam. A prosumer cam will start to encounter noise at iso100 and very noticeable at iso200.

On a 300D, you can go up to iso400 and still get relatively noiseless images. In fact, 300D at iso400 is like a prosumer at iso100. So in terms of noise control, you are getting very good image quality. In terms of sharpness, prosumer cams usually have smaller sensors and higher sharpening done. 300D allows you to select the amount of sharpening to be done or even shoot RAW. For color saturation, again, this is user selectable. Kit lens built quality isn't the best but the glass is decent. Fairly sharp wideopen and very sharp at f8.


EOS300D with EF-S 18-55mm @ f5.6, 1/50, 55mm, iso100

As to your choice of prosumer versus DSLR... it really depends on your needs. A prosumer cam is more portable but noise control isn't as good. It will also not focus as fast as a DSLR.

A DSLR has good noise control, partly due to the larger sensor. Allows you to change the lens as your need changes. Also allows you to have control over lots of aspect of capturing the image. Its quite big though... But there are some DSLR that are shrinking in size to rival that of a prosumer cam... eg, 350D and Pentax ist*D.

[plinius]

Zplus, nice picture to show the capability of the Kit lens

Originally Posted by Zplus Wide prime lens - EF24mm General Purpose Zoom lens - Kit lens Would I be right to say that most prosumer cam at lowest iso setting is better than 300D+kit lens in term of image quality? Depends on what you mean by image quality... the 300D + Kit lens at iso100 (lowest setting) would be less noisey then any prosumer cam. A prosumer cam will start to encounter noise at iso100 and very noticeable at iso200. On a 300D, you can go up to iso400 and still get relatively noiseless images. In fact, 300D at iso400 is like a prosumer at iso100. So in terms of noise control, you are getting very good image quality. In terms of sharpness, prosumer cams usually have smaller sensors and higher sharpening done. 300D allows you to select the amount of sharpening to be done or even shoot RAW. For color saturation, again, this is user selectable. Kit lens built quality isn't the best but the glass is decent. Fairly sharp wideopen and very sharp at f8. EOS300D with EF-S 18-55mm @ f5.6, 1/50, 55mm, iso100 As to your choice of prosumer versus DSLR... it really depends on your needs. A prosumer cam is more portable but noise control isn't as good. It will also not focus as fast as a DSLR. A DSLR has good noise control, partly due to the larger sensor. Allows you to change the lens as your need changes. Also allows you to have control over lots of aspect of capturing the image. Its quite big though... But there are some DSLR that are shrinking in size to rival that of a prosumer cam... eg, 350D and Pentax ist*D.

[Snowcrash]

I got a DSLR for iso400 and iso800 though the size is much bigger than my previous cam oly c4040.

And I carry a compact camera in a paper bag! (film if I want 800 or digital if I use only iso100) for days I don't want to carry the camera bag.

Prosumer models size wise neither here or there... still need to bring a camera bag....

[RossChang]

the 300D's Kit lens IS a decent lens to get and the image quality is Not that bad. you could probably spend 3-4 times the price and get a better lens but result won't be noticable until you blow it up big big...

[Terence]

I'd recommend the Tamron SP 24-135mm as a great walkaround standard zoom. AF is not decidely fast and is a tad noisy but the lens represents great value for money (approx $500 for a EX+ used copy, $600 new). Clear images with good color rendition and a very useful zoom length.

[mpenza]

Canon EF 24-85 is also a good alternative. Fast AF and pretty decent sharpness. Have used it as my main walkaround lens before I replaced it with the Sigma 18-125 DC.

some samples taken by the 24-85:
http://mpenza.clubsnap.org/gallery/bridal04
http://mpenza.clubsnap.org/gallery/MW04

[Keltzar]

I have the Canon EF28-105 and the 17-35L.
Then I bought the Sigma 18-50/4-5.6 DC for $170 new.

The Sigma blew me away. Optically it was good... it was small, light and compact... the working range is useful.. and most importantly ... it focused closer than many of the Canon zooms...

And at $170 ... even if it breaks, throw it away and buy another one.

The shots I've done with the Sigma are good enough for publication . I'd say more about this except that issue is due out this month and I haven't seen it yet.

I think the EFS 18-55 is a good alternative, if not better.

[edward1]

I have Tamron 28-75 F2.8, a really sharp lens. It can produce vivid color and contrasty pictures. I bought it at around $640.

[gootlah]

I've recently used the 18-55 and found that it's sharp @ 55mm and the blurry @ 18mm. With this I got a 17-40 instead.

[sumball]

Photos here were taken using the kit lens, they look fine with me and I like my kit lens more and more...

http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=116542