Yep, i am eyeing for canon 50mm f1.8 too.. Since everyone said its agood prime lens and its cheap too.. Think it will be good as a starter lens.. But i really fall in love with a wide angle zoom lens..:lovegrin: So trying to consider which are the good wide angle zoom (like the tamron 24-135mm or 17-35mm or 17-70mm) hahaha;pBenji77 said:
Budget Lens---- Need Advice!!!
- Thread starter redboy872002
- Start date
- Status
redboy872002 said::bigeyes: Sigma 28-105 is not good? i never know that!! Thanks isaiahfortythirtyone... ;p Is it not good because its not sharp enough or wat ah?
can you pls elaborate? haha.. Cos for a newbie like me, watever lens that got f2.8 and below seem attractive..:dunno: Thanks for the reply...
as the *** MPs would say... "there is no free lunch." 28-105mm f/2.8-4 lens for $320 ONLY? something smells fishy around here. such a huge range but such a big aperture. plus the fact that if you look closely, only one special element is used (ASPH). take a look at the MTF graphs, although not an absolute authority it does give you an idea about sharpness, http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3267&navigator=2
big range + big aperture + small price = fishy. ;p
Isaiahfortythirtyone said:
keke... it falls under the MHCU (mai hiam can use) category of lenses. :bsmilie:
tamron, IIRC, has also a similar 28-105/2.8 lens. if not, the current tamron 28-75/2.8 is also a good starter for low-light work.
Haaah? so realli realli bad ah? Aiyo, lucky im not that fast to buy this lens.. hahaha... But the tamron 28-105/2.8 is better? Anw, normally u guys rate sigma lens better or tamron ah? Since both are 3rd party.. Thanks for the advice.. :biggrin:nightwolf75 said:
the tamron 28-105mm also has mixed reviews. quite a few people say you have to go to 5.6 before it gets sharp. plus it weighs a ton. ;p
sigma or tamron...both are decent. just be careful when you buy make sure you test
sigma or tamron...both are decent. just be careful when you buy
make sure you testHmm ok understooded..Isaiahfortythirtyone said:the tamron 28-105mm also has mixed reviews. quite a few people say you have to go to 5.6 before it gets sharp. plus it weighs a ton. ;p
sigma or tamron...both are decent. just be careful when you buy
Aiyah, still cant decide leh, like some lens cover a wide range at the expense of image quality, then also got the reverse (superb quality but small range like 17-35mm) But one thing for sure that im buying 3rd party lens.. So yup, is there any other lens that is particularly gd according to your experience?? Now im considering:
1) sigma 18-125mm
2) tamron 28-105mm
3) sigma 18-50mm
4) tamron 28-75mm
haagen_dazs
New Member
i would recommend the Tokina ATX 28-70 f2.8 lens.
Search up for more info about it. Has alot of great reviews.
Search up for more info about it. Has alot of great reviews.
I strongly recommend sigma 18-50/2.8. i sold my canon 28-105/3.5-4.5 usm2 after i got the sigma.
http://singaporephoto.blogspot.com
http://singaporephoto.blogspot.com
Ahoy!!! Getting my 50mm lens tmw!!!!! hahahha.. So next target is a wide zoom! But havent decided which one to buy yet..
but the 50mm like out of stock liao... i ask MS colour and hey say have to take a month for the stock to come. waiting list is a cool 20+ ppl... nikon mount....
Hhaha.. be patient xiaowugui82.. The lens is worth waiting for!! Im buying the lens from a fellow CS-er..
WOOHOO!!! Got my 50mm alr this afternoon...
Anyway, got some views about 3rd party lens.. Some say that tamron offers greater quality than sigma though sigma caters to almost every focal range... What do you all think?? Kindly share your experience with 3rd party lens if you have any... Many Thanks!!
Anyway, got some views about 3rd party lens.. Some say that tamron offers greater quality than sigma though sigma caters to almost every focal range... What do you all think?? Kindly share your experience with 3rd party lens if you have any... Many Thanks!!
Do remember, that for the 18-125, 28-105, you might need to use flash when shooting in concerts.redboy872002 said:Hmm ok understooded..
Now im considering:
1) sigma 18-125mm
2) tamron 28-105mm
3) sigma 18-50mm
4) tamron 28-75mm
For the 18-50, 28-75, you might not have enough reach.
Well, for a budget setup
I would recommend
Sigma 18-200 ( About $450 2nd hand? )
This is an all rounder General Purpose lens
if you're going for an all canon setup
Canon 18-55 ( kit lens )
Canon 28-105 USM II ( Walkabout. Good colours and performance ) $300 used
Canon 75-300 USM II ( Zoom ) $300 used
Canon 50mm f1.8 ( Prime, Night Shot ) $130 used
Just nice for your budget.
Canon 17-85mm @ $800+ is a good General purpose lens, with IS and covers wide to a bit of zoom.
I would recommend
Sigma 18-200 ( About $450 2nd hand? )
This is an all rounder General Purpose lens
if you're going for an all canon setup
Canon 18-55 ( kit lens )
Canon 28-105 USM II ( Walkabout. Good colours and performance ) $300 used
Canon 75-300 USM II ( Zoom ) $300 used
Canon 50mm f1.8 ( Prime, Night Shot ) $130 used
Just nice for your budget.
Canon 17-85mm @ $800+ is a good General purpose lens, with IS and covers wide to a bit of zoom.
Hey tmfwy... thanks for the advice bro!!! but maybe u didnt notice that i'm using an EOS 10D, which cant fit kit lens (18-55mm) and also 17-85mm... Yup, but the other lenses are quite good too..
If you do decide to try third party lens, make sure you buy them with warranty. My experience with the Tamron was disappointing. I had focusing problem and had to be sent overseas for calibration by the Singapore local agent. Waiting time >More than 1 month.
If you have the budget, buy the best lens you can afford. No point having many mediocre lens. I used to make such mistakes ... had a collection of cheap and mid-end lens that didnt work out well enough for me.
For indoor, you need f2.8 at least for versatility. The most affordable is the 50 mm f1.8 of course and it perform very well. For tele, suggest you save up and buy that 70 - 200mm f4L at least. I tried everything from Canon 70 - 300mm, 75 - 300mm, 100 - 300mm etc and found them lacking in various aspects. After started using L lens and having seen the diff in the contrast and sharpness, the rest was history ...
Either buy cheap cheap lens below $300 OR buy that entry level L at about $1200. No point spending on all mid-range lens that can adds up to quite a fair bit.
If you have the budget, buy the best lens you can afford. No point having many mediocre lens. I used to make such mistakes ... had a collection of cheap and mid-end lens that didnt work out well enough for me.
For indoor, you need f2.8 at least for versatility. The most affordable is the 50 mm f1.8 of course and it perform very well. For tele, suggest you save up and buy that 70 - 200mm f4L at least. I tried everything from Canon 70 - 300mm, 75 - 300mm, 100 - 300mm etc and found them lacking in various aspects. After started using L lens and having seen the diff in the contrast and sharpness, the rest was history ...
Either buy cheap cheap lens below $300 OR buy that entry level L at about $1200. No point spending on all mid-range lens that can adds up to quite a fair bit.
- Status
Similar threads
