Zoom Lenses


Status
Not open for further replies.
Jun 26, 2007
33
0
0
#1
Hi all,

Am a newbie here and need help with lenses. I own Canon 400D and looking for another zoom lense. I have shortlisted the below lenses. Can the experts out there help to explain the difference? The IS I assume is Image Stabiliser? Sorry ah, am still learning.

I would also like to know what is the meaning of the numbers like 28-135.
28-- is it the width? hw wide u can take the pic?
eg: 105 or 135- hw far i can zoom?
USM versus non-USM - got difference?

Thanks very much
Sandy :D


EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM : (Yen78,000/US$420) RS$1,100 - CP-M $690 / MS $675
EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM : (Yen45,000/US$330) RS$690 - MS $338 / TCW $450 / CP $348
 

Jun 26, 2007
33
0
0
#2
am also looking at filter and flash.
am on budget here and I am thinking abt the 200plus flash, is it good enough?
 

zoossh

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2005
8,725
0
0
Singapore
#3
The IS I assume is Image Stabiliser? Sorry ah, am still learning.
yes

I would also like to know what is the meaning of the numbers like 28-135.
28-- is it the width? hw wide u can take the pic?
eg: 105 or 135- hw far i can zoom?
focal length. they decide the angle of vision.
the shorter the focal length, the wider the angle, the more it will frame, the smaller will then be a subject.

the difference in size of item varies with the distance it is from you, so there is no quantification.

to give a rough idea. from my recent shots.


this is 20mm focal length, which corrected by sensor size is equivalence of 30mm on a 35mm film camera. i'm standing about 10m from the nearest subject, but becos of the wide angle, they look further as they are smaller.


this is 170mm focal length, which corrected by sensor size is equivalence of 255mm on a 35mm film camera. i'm standing about 3-5m from the monkey, otherwise could be dangerous for myself. a long focal length is required for close-up from a semi distance or whole body from a long distance.


USM versus non-USM - got difference?
theoretically, a motor on the lens enable faster autofocus and for shooting on the streets, more quiet

p.s. i can't advise on canon as i'm using nikon
 

zoossh

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2005
8,725
0
0
Singapore
#4
by the way, read more into the guide i wrote if you like. or to save your confusion if you read from another beginner/amateur, get a book is better.
 

lsisaxon

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2004
11,941
0
0
#6
this is 20mm focal length, which corrected by sensor size is equivalence of 30mm on a 35mm film camera. i'm standing about 10m from the nearest subject, but becos of the wide angle, they look further as they are smaller.
I think for people who have not used the 135 format, it doesn't matter what is the equivalent angle you'll get on a FF. A more correct way is probably by saying a 17mm would give you an angle of 79 degrees on a DX.
 

zoossh

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2005
8,725
0
0
Singapore
#7
I think for people who have not used the 135 format, it doesn't matter what is the equivalent angle you'll get on a FF. A more correct way is probably by saying a 17mm would give you an angle of 79 degrees on a DX.
i also do not use film. but across different sensor sizes, we use crop factor on our focal length. i think most people cannot remember how many degrees a focal length is, at least i can't, but i agree it would be good to know.
 

lsisaxon

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2004
11,941
0
0
#8
i also do not use film. but across different sensor sizes, we use crop factor on our focal length. i think most people cannot remember how many degrees a focal length is, at least i can't, but i agree it would be good to know.
One way is to just remember what's the 'normal' (AoV about 45 degrees) focal length for the sensor size, any focal length shorter than this 'normal' focal length is wide angle and anything longer is tele.

For 135 it's 50mm, for DX it's about 35mm, for 120: 6x4.5 - 75mm, 6x6 - 80mm, 6x7 - 90mm.

But I think CIPA is coming out with a guideline that the 135 format equivalent focal length be included as part of the speccification because of the popularity of the format...
http://www.cipa.jp/english/hyoujunka/kikaku/pdf/DCG-X002_E.pdf
 

zoossh

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2005
8,725
0
0
Singapore
#10
but more expensive.

by relying on proper techniques without a VR lens, you can achieve better results than using a VR lens but with poor techniques. of cos, if you got both, it will help further. a price to pay for
 

Jun 26, 2007
33
0
0
#12
thanks for the response.
I am just looking at general shooting, like on holidays, taking my dogs photos, gatherings etc.
So, I dun think I would want to change my lens so often.
Thatz y I am looking at 28mm-105 mm range for normal usage will do.
Is this the right way to go?

Aperture etc, I tik I am not at that level yet, and focal point etc, I read and read but I do not understand. So I just need a decent lens which I can take with me and dun have to change lens. Hope this response of mine does not invite slamming. :sweat:
 

zoossh

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2005
8,725
0
0
Singapore
#13
thanks for the response.
I am just looking at general shooting, like on holidays, taking my dogs photos, gatherings etc.
So, I dun think I would want to change my lens so often.
Thatz y I am looking at 28mm-105 mm range for normal usage will do.
Is this the right way to go?

Aperture etc, I tik I am not at that level yet, and focal point etc, I read and read but I do not understand. So I just need a decent lens which I can take with me and dun have to change lens. Hope this response of mine does not invite slamming. :sweat:
i see. lens are not easy to have all features you want. i suggest that you further narrow down the focal range and opt for one with a larger maximum aperture size so as to improve shooting of dynamic events (moving subjects like dogs) or in lower light (indoor daytime). i suppose you would prefer a lighter lens too. so forgo the short tele component and go for a kit lens focal range but with a larger aperture size. something like 17-55mm f/2.8 suitable brands.

can consider third party for better value for money. if you dun expect much about optical quality, you can save more and pay the little extra on the larger aperture size.

a range of 17-55mm will enable to do a group or family photo in a large room as well as to do a fair close-up of half-body to quarter body portraits. it can be done for your dog too, if you go close enough.
 

Jun 26, 2007
33
0
0
#14
thanks so much for the advice.
After much reading, I am deciding if I should get 24-105mm F4/L IS USM or cheaper alternative such as 18-200 Sigma or Tamron lens. Please help~
 

giantcanopy

Senior Member
Feb 11, 2007
6,232
2
0
SG
#15
If you see yourself upgrading the lens next time to the Canon L equivalent, and since u r considering it. why not just save the hassle and get it ?

i am no Canon user too :)

Cheers
Ryan
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom