Recommendation for wide angle and macro lens for the Rebel Xti?

[Turando]

Hi,

I decided to purchase a Canon Rebel Xti and wanted to get two lenses with it - wide angle and macro lens. The first is for landscape photography and the second is for up close shots of products for our online store.

Any recommendations for lenses for the Canon?

My budget I'm not sure of but I don't want to spend 1000 on a lens. So something that is decent and not too high in price would be great. I'm new to photography so all my research is making my brain hurt

If I get a lens for landscapes and then a lens for macro would I need another lens for normal photography of family and friends?

Thanks in advance

[TPF Sponsor]

[shingfan]

what kind of product do you sell.....are you sure you need a macro for product shots? you can always shot and crop when posting online.....of course i dont know what you are selling and you might really need macro to get very fine details....just a thought

[Turando]

Hi,

I don't need really any fine detail. Just close up shots of things like pdas, mobile phones, mp4 players etc. I'm pretty new to all this so I kind of just assumed macro might be needed though someone did mention that maybe a normal lens could take the shots as well.

I am going overseas and need to get the things I need before then so I haven't been able to do that much research on which lenses would be good to take

My needs are pretty average I'd say. I want to take photos during our travels of various places and take photos of our products. That'll help me to get used to the camera and then I can always add on other lenses if I get really into it. With our travel photos (which is what I mentioned the wide-angle lens for) I want to be able to blow them up a bit (not huge or anything) and print them.

Thankyou!

[shingfan]

i think a normal lense would suit your need at a much lower cost.......and remember to get a light tent for better light distribution over the product

for product shots......you need good lightings (light tent)......a tripod........aperature adjustment as needed.........small aperature with long exposure for chormatic background......large aperature fi you want narrow DOF

[Turando]

Hi,

I'm beginning to think a normal lens might be good to try out first. What is considered a normal lens though?

Would a normal lens be alright for taking photos during travels as well say of landscapes etc?

Thankyou

[shingfan]

Hi,

I'm beginning to think a normal lens might be good to try out first. What is considered a normal lens though?

Would a normal lens be alright for taking photos during travels as well say of landscapes etc?

Thankyou

i would say kit lense = normal lense in this sense......they usually come with the camera body as a kit......and once you figure out which range you shoot the most....then i would upgrade to a better lense of that range

as for landscape......it's a matter of preference......wide angle would be good for large coverage......but is that your shooting goal when you shoot landscape?......

[Big Mike]

Typical shots of cell phones, PDAs etc...isn't really macro...it's just close up. So I'd think that you can easily use a standard lens...especially if it's only for web viewing.

The standard lens that usually comes with the camera EF-S 18-55 F3.5-5.6, is OK. It's cheap...and not a great lens but it's pretty good for the price. It's fairly wide...but not really wide. If you want a really wide lens...have a look at the Canon EF-S 10-22, or similar lenses from Tamron, Sigma or Tokina.

[Turando]

Hi,

I'm thinking to try out a normal lens first and maybe a wide angle lens. I'll skip the macro lens for now.

Is there a better alternative to the standard one (EF-S 18-55)? I don't mind paying more for it.

Thankyou

[MPowerM3]

Get the 17-85 efs with is from canon, its a great lens, feels really good and the is is great. Its not much more and a great lens for the money!!

[shingfan]

Hi,

I'm thinking to try out a normal lens first and maybe a wide angle lens. I'll skip the macro lens for now.

Is there a better alternative to the standard one (EF-S 18-55)? I don't mind paying more for it.

Thankyou

i think this kit lense is pretty good at its price range.......if you want somethign better...than you'll be stepping into the $1k+ range.....which i suggest you dont buy until you know what you need......

what do you shoot the most? Providing more information about what is your shooting habit will provide other people to give you suggestion as to what would be good for your use.....unfortunatly my experience is limited and cant help you choose a better lense....but if you are going to get something better......you should get somethign significantly better...not something a little better for a couple hundred bucks....because you wouldnt notice the difference

[Big Mike]

Is there a better alternative to the standard one (EF-S 18-55)? I don't mind paying more for it.

There certainly is.

There is the Canon EF-S 17-85 F4-5.6 IS USM. I have this lens and it's much better than the kit...especially the focus and the build quality. It also has Image Stabilization...which is a really great feature. The downside to this lens is that the maximum aperture is not very big (it's slow). IS will help you get sharper shots...but not if the subjects are moving.

For that reason, I just bought a new lens...today actually . The lens I just got is the Tamron 17-50 F2.8. It has a maximum aperture of F2.8 for the whole zoom range...which is something I need for shooting weddings etc.
There is also a Sigma 18-50 F2.8 that is similar to the Tamron.
Both these lenses are said to have very good image and build quality. Not as good as top of the line Canon lenses...but still very good at a pretty good price.

The best lens is this category is the Canon EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS. It has a big max aperture and Image Stabilization...it's very expensive though...more than the camera.

There are other choices as well. Tamron 17-70 gets good reviews...but it doesn't have a constantly wide aperture.

If you want a tough lens, the Canon 17-40 F4 L is a good one. Canon L lenses are all really, really good and built very well. This lens will also work on full frame digital and film EOS cameras as well...if that is important to you. The aperture isn't that big...but the image quality is said to be fantastic.

[ericande]

Another option for ya, my buddy has this lens for Canon and I just picked it with a Nikon mount: Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5?. It's under $400, good feel, pretty sharp and gets to almost true macro. I would spend the rest of your budget on a softbox and all that for your product shots.

[Turando]

Hi,

Thanks for all your recommendations. I'm reading reviews currently on them.

My shortlist so far is

- Tamron 17-50 F2.8
- Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5
- Sigma 18-50 F2.8

Out of the two Sigmas which one would be considered better?

Big Mike - how are you finding the Tamron?

And sorry to sound clueless - but is the difference of 50 and 70 in the Sigmas a big difference?

Thankyou!

[shingfan]

you should try out the area that what different focal length provide to get a real feel...the difference is small.....even i compare a 135mm to a 200mm...the different is small (for me...lol )....but sometimes the small difference is what you need....you'll be the judge on that.....but do get a fixed f/2.8 on entire range if you can afford

[Big Mike]

The difference between 50mnm and 70mm is small...but there is a difference. It's up to you to decide.

but do get a fixed f/2.8 on entire range if you can afford

I agree. It's most important to have faster shutter speeds at the longest focal length...and that's where having a full range F2.8 is really handy.

Big Mike - how are you finding the Tamron?

I've only had it a few hours and I'm here at work. It feels really good and sturdy. One difference from the Canon 17-85...is that the Canon has a USM focus motor...which is very quiet. The Tamron focus is fast but more noisy than the USM of the Canon.

I picked this lens based on reviews and internet chatter. It gets great reviews for image quality and the max F2.8 aperture is really what I'm after most. For average snap shooting...the Canon with IS...is practically as good, but for shooting people in lower light...the F2.8 is a life saver.

The image quality of the Tamron should be better than the 17-85...but I have yet to set them together. Once I get it all sorted out...I will probably sell the 17-85 IS...as well as the old 18-55 kit lens.