Anti shake/ vibraton compensation lens?

Naturallyred · Apr 14, 2008

Hey everyone!

Im in the market for a new lens that has anti shake or vibration compenation. I own a rebel canon xti and don't want to spend any more than $300-$325ish. I'd like it to be 18-75mm or something close to it. I mostly shoot portrait's.....if that matters at all.

Can anyone help me find a good lens?

Thanks!

keith204 · Apr 14, 2008

I have a Canon 17-85 IS that I really like. You can get it from B&H for $515. I'm considering selling mine soon to put that towards a 17-55 f/2.8 IS.

(PM me if you are interested in buying it

)

soylentgreen · Apr 14, 2008

In that price range, it'll be hard. Maybe the new EF 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS. Dunno street price on it or quality but anything else is in the $600+ range. For portraits, you might look into a fast prime lens. Like the 50 f/1.4 or 85 f/1.8. A large aperature, sharp prime is always desirable for portraits and low-light over IS anyday. Both are around your price range.

keith204 · Apr 14, 2008

What lens do you have now? Soylentgreen had a good idea for fast primes instead of a zoom (for portraits)

Naturallyred · Apr 16, 2008

Right now I use what the XTi- it's basic but works for now. I've actually never hear of a fast prime. What is that exactly? I'm really open for anything as long as it helps me in the studio in low light for portraits.

keith204 · Apr 16, 2008

Naturallyred said:
Right now I use what the XTi- it's basic but works for now. I've actually never hear of a fast prime. What is that exactly? I'm really open for anything as long as it helps me in the studio in low light for portraits.

oooh, you are missing out! Go buy a 50mm f/1.8 right now! It's only $89 and will be the best $89 you'll ever spend. It'll give you a great foreground/background blur that will really enhance portraits. Not to mention it does BETTER in low-light than a f/4.0-5.6 IS lens. It's small, lightweight, doesn't zoom, 50mm is a great portrait length on a crop body.

Mike_E · Apr 17, 2008

Tripods are good.

Naturallyred · May 5, 2008

Awesome I will get one of those asap!! Thank for the info. Can yo ugive me a link to get it??

I don't like using a tripod because they just don't give me the movement/angles I need. Maybe thats because I use a cheap one.

Maybe a mono-pod would work? But then there is always movement frm the subject when using a tri/mono-pod.

Look's like I'm going with the lense.

usayit · May 5, 2008

I second the nifty fifty for portraits. If you can afford a bit more cash, the 50mm f/1.4 is a nicer lens. The 85mm f/1.8 and the 100mm macro are also good lenses for this work.

Naturallyred said:
I don't like using a tripod because they just don't give me the movement/angles I need.
Maybe thats because I use a cheap one. Maybe a mono-pod would work?

This just means you haven't found a tripod that fits our needs. Monopod is a compromise. Rarely do I see portrait photographers in a studio ~not~ use some sort of support. Since you mentioned "Anti-shake/vibration" in your title, it is the assumption that handshake is the issue of which the best solution is a support.

But then there is always movement frm the subject when using a tri/mono-pod.

Yes.. you are right but then again "anti-shake/vibration" lenses such as Canon's IS and Nikons VR also will not solve blur occurring from subject movement... which brings us back to your title of the thread.

JustAnEngineer · May 6, 2008

At $85, the "nifty fifty" EF 50mm f/1.8 II is Canon's cheapest EF lens, but it has a wide aperture and can take very good photos despite its plastic housing. Here are a couple of reviews:
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Can.../160-canon-ef-50mm-f18-ii-test-report--review
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-50mm-f-1.8-II-Lens-Review.aspx

The $430 Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM might be a useful choice if 30mm is the focal length for you and you want a really wide aperture. The field of view with this lens is equivalent to 48mm on a full-frame sensor, making it similar to the classic 50mm. Here's a review:
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Can...gma-af-30mm-f14-ex-hsm-dc-test-report--review
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-30mm-f-1.4-EX-DC-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx

There are several direct replacements for your kit lens, if you just want a better quality zoom with the same range.

The new EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lens that Soylentgreen suggested from the Rebel XSi kit goes for $175, but it is backordered everywhere. The $400 Tamron AF17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II would be an intermediate step short of the excellent $1000 EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.

Sw1tchFX · May 7, 2008

keith204 said:
I have a Canon 17-85 IS that I really like. You can get it from B&H for $515. I'm considering selling mine soon to put that towards a 17-55 f/2.8 IS.

(PM me if you are interested in buying it )

The range of the 17-85 is awsome. At my school we have them on the 40D's and they're fun to use, but the images look terrible. It's not a sharp lens at all.

Naturallyred · May 8, 2008

I'm so confused and stumped on which lens to get. I don't want to get the nifty fifty because I like to be able to zoom a bit for head shot's and then full body shot's. I just don't think it would be comfortable for me. But then I thought I would get a lens that was 17-85 or something really close to that but now I hear the image quality is bad- not sharp enough. I'm not sure what I'm going to do- any other suggestions that wont cost me an arm and a leg?

Thanks to everyone!!

usayit · May 8, 2008

The issue is that you want the image quality provided by a prime with the flexibility of a zoom. In order to get into a zoom that "approaches" the quality of a prime, you will be spending more money. The 24-70L falls into this category and is the bread and butter of most wedding photographers (that shoot canon).

Once you reduce your budget, you have to further accept compromises. You either go with the flexibility of a zoom but the image quality will not be the same as possible with a prime OR you get a prime and compromise the flexibilty of zoom.

To be honest.... most modern lenses in the Canon line up are "good enough" for most photographers out there.... and yes.. i do mean non-L's as well. The difference is within what limitations are you willing to accept. Even soft lenses are sharp if you stop down a couple stops in good light.

Remember.. zoom is not just to bring things closer or farther out.... it is a change in focal length and thus composition. You are essentially choosing the paint brush from which to paint with.

Naturallyred · May 8, 2008

Thank you. I know I will figure it out sooner or later

Sw1tchFX · May 9, 2008

Naturallyred said:
I'm so confused and stumped on which lens to get. I don't want to get the nifty fifty because I like to be able to zoom a bit for head shot's and then full body shot's.

Well you also need to understand how the perspective works, 24mm isn't' the same as 50mm and stepping back.