- This topic is empty.
Clarity vs Quantity
-
Hi Everyone,
I am about to order a 50D from ParkCamera’s (best deal I could find) but at this stage I am tossed about which lens to get. It is either going with a kit lens being the 17-85mm IS, 18-200mm IS, both or something else.
The issue is I’ve looked at a lot of samples and read tests on these lenses and they seem to lack clarity although you get a bang for your buck. Now I know the more money you spend the better the quality you will get. There are also so many lenses on the market that it makes it daunting to decide what to buy. I can’t spend more that Eur400 which I guess is not a lot when it comes to lenses in general and not to speak of prime lens prices but non the less it should be able to buy me something decent.
I like to take pictures about everything at this stage and have no real preference. Maybe outdoors, trees, landscapes, cars the occasional flower and general pics is what I want to use it for mainly in the beginning.
Can anyone please suggest something else I might consider for these purposes and which will compliment the 50D? There are quite a few places that seems to sell good 2nd hand/near new lenses so that might enable me to buy at a fraction better.
Thanks in advance
Hi Jetpack. There is an almost endless choice on the market and very hard for someone to make the correct choice for you. What camera do you have at the moment? Why choose the 50D? These are just a few questions that I would ask. Cameras lose their value quiet quickly, whereas lenses tend to keep theirs. I would be looking at a cheaper camera model and more expensive glass. I have a 450D and a 50D and to be honest, if I didn’t know better, looking at a photo, I wouldn’t be able to tell which camera was used. The 450D is approx 400 yoyos cheaper than the 50D and is still a great camera. This would give you an extra 400 to spend on your choice of lens/lenses. Also Canon lenses are usually more expensive than other lenses offering the same focal lenghts. Sigma lenses are often as good if not superior in quality to the Canon lenses so this is something else you could consider and if you could get secondhand all the better. Personally,I would be trying to get the best quality glass that I could afford rather than the best quality camera.
Sounds like good advice to me Miki. I’ll second that.
I would advise staying away from super-zooms i.e. with a wide range of focal lengths, like the 18-200. Apart from image-quality, it’s bound to be fairly slow.
I have a 17-85mm EF-S but just be aware it’s not going to work with a full-frame camera if you ever upgrade to one. It’s not the best lens money can buy but I think it’s a decent enough “walk-around” lens. I can’t really fault it but then I don’t have an “L” glass to compare with.
Regards,
Noel.I never really gave thought to buying a good camera (new or 2nd hand) rather spending loads of money and not being able to buy one proper lens to start with. 99% of kit lenses with the 50D doesn’t seem to get the best of reviews from all the places I’ve visited (reviews).
So what I decided to do is see if I can find a reasonably new 40D and rather spend that bit of money I save towards a decent lens. Yes, it would be nice to use a few new functions on the 50D but I gree with you guys with putting that money rather towards one decent lens new or good 2nd hand.
That brings me to to a point miki_g made about so many lenses on the market. I don’t expect anyone to make a decision in what to buy but rather just propose to what lens/lenses I should try and focus on for what I want to photograph.
I am going to make a note of the 17-85 Focused mentioned because I guess outdoors, trees, landscapes, cars the occasional flower and general pics falls into that category..
Thanks guys
Hi Jetpack,
I say get a 500D, as stated above , better value for money, besides, you get HD recording function as well!
Also, The 18-200, despite having a huge range, is said to be surprisingly good, and as a starters lens, you can’t go much better. Not a big fan of the 17-85, it has a lot of barrel distortion at 17MM.
Just my 5c ;)
Here’s a review of the 17-85 http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-17-85mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
I see what you mean and with the 500D it might be a more economic buy than a 2nd hand 40D which you don’t really know if the previous owner had any issues. I’ll have a look at the prices for the 500D and yes the HD recording might come in handy as well and apart from that it is still more than Eur200 saving on just the body.
Guess this is why PI makes life a bit easier :)
proach wrote:
Hi Jetpack,
I say get a 500D, as stated above , better value for money, besides, you get HD recording function as well!
Also, The 18-200, despite having a huge range, is said to be surprisingly good, and as a starters lens, you can’t go much better. Not a big fan of the 17-85, it has a lot of barrel distortion at 17MM.
Just my 5c ;)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
