Help me pick a lens?

[Tazzerina]

I'm new here and new to DSLRs. I bought a Rebel XT body new, but being a student, can only afford used lenses. So far I have a Canon 28-80mm and am hoping to get a telephoto or macro. Because of price restrictions, I have two main offers, but wanted an opinion as to which is a better quality lens. I can get either:
A Seikanon MC Auto Zoom 1:4.5 75-200mm or a Tamron 80-200mm (both are for pretty much the same price) Ideally I'd love to get a 75-300 or something nicer, but right now this is the best I can afford and would like to hear your thoughts.
Thanks!

 

[woodsac]

Welcome

Couple things to think about.

What are you interested in shooting? Macro is fun, but requires a lot of dedication. And in most cases, extra gear. For available light macros, more times than not you need a nice tripod and a remote release. Or in the other case, a bracket and external flash. = $$$

A zoom...I can't comment too much on zooms. I had one, 75-300, and I sold it :scratch: I just didn't use it as much as I thought I would. The more that I shot, the more I found that I liked to be close to my subject. Or when I couldn't be close, shoot wider to take in the surrounding for more of an environmental photo.

I don't know what the prices are on the above lenses. But you could always look into something like the Sigma 18-200. It's around $350. It's slow, but it takes nice sharp photos.

We can definitely give you a better answer if we know what you'll be shooting, and what your budget is

 

[Tazzerina]

I know it doesn't help much, but I really do a little of everything. I may have a job shooting bands and a soccer team, but I also love portrait and absrtact stuff. I want to be able to get close up but it doesn't have to be a nice expensive macro lens. My budget is about $100 unfortunately, so it really depends on how much individual people are willing to sell them for. I can get the Seikanon for $60 and the Tamron for $70.

 

[woodsac]

I think it comes down to a "half full" or "half empty" clause

If you don't have a lens, you may not get to shoot at all. And in most cases, something is better than nothing.

But, I've learned the hard way. A "right now" lens is nothing more than a band-aid. You will immediately outgrow it and long for a more professional lens to meet you creativity.

The main thing to consider here is quality. If they are both capable of producing similar image quality, then go for the fastest of the two.

 

[Tazzerina]

That's why I was wondering if anyone could tell me which was better quality.

 

[Don Simon]

Just a thought... Seikanon sounds familiar to me... I could be wrong but I think it was one of the many names to appear on cheaper third-party lenses in the 70s/80s... now judging by the prices I am assuming you found these lenses on Ebay? If so... is it possible that the Seikanon (and possibly also the Tamron) were actually not for Canon EOS but for the older Canon manual-focus SLRs?

Even if they are the right fit... personally I would skip both. How far could you stretch your budget? For under $200 you could pick up a Tamron 70-300mm... it won't make your jaw drop in amazement, you probably won't want to shoot at 300mm much, but for $200 it's pretty good. And it has a 1:2 magnification ratio, which is not true macro but is ok. I expect the same applies to the nearest comparable Canon lens which I think would be the 75-300mm (non-IS) at the same price. Honestly I would stick to newer zooms such as these; cheaper consumer zooms have really improved over the years.