Lens Suggestions/Advice Please - Sorry this is nothing new

[jaomul]

The 55-250mm is a very good value Tele Lens with very good image quality. If you need 70-300 I would suss out the Tamron 70-300mm before the Canon before you decide

 

[ReInvented2012]

Unfortunatley lenses that are of a good optical quality aren't cheap, but it really depends on your budget. If you want to shoot macro shots of bugs and stuff the longer the better, as you can be a bit further away and therefore more likely to get the shot without disturbing the bug. Common focal lengths range from 50mm to 100mm but it's important that its 1:1 and not a 1:2 or something with a macro mode. I'm a bit confused about what you think the 10-22mm will do for you. Its a wider lens than your 18-55mm so it won't get you closer to the stars that's for sure. What it will probably do is allow you to include more foreground in your shots as that's where these types of wide angle lenses work well. To get close up pictures of space you pretty much need to strap got camera on a telescope to get anything other than white dots. I dont mean to sound rude but I think you need to get setup with a tripod first and get reading on how to get some good star shots with your 18n55mm first before you think of buying a new lens for this as most of the issues I see in those shots have nothing to do with the lens.

I am definitely looking into tripods and have one picked out so that's taken care of kind of lol. I also looked into telescopes. Would getting a tripod and telescope be necessary or is it fine to just get the telescope that's in it's own stand? Just want to make sure the actual telescope and camera would be interchangeable on the stand. Or I get a tripod and a table telescope that could maybe go on the tripod I buy. This is literally my first time at all this so that's why I don't know the answer to a seemingly simple question.

To be honest I don't know where the idea for a 10/22mm came from. I probably read something or saw a picture where that lens was used and thought it was good (definitely wouldn't have been deep space pics).

Thanks for all the help.

 

[ReInvented2012]

The 55-250mm is a very good value Tele Lens with very good image quality. If you need 70-300 I would suss out the Tamron 70-300mm before the Canon before you decide

I will look into it, it's probably more in my price range to. Do you think the build quality is the same? (Obviously plastic for this level lens right)

 

[weepete]

I'm not too sure about how it would work with a telescope mate but I wouldn't imagine you'd need a tripod for the camera in addition to the one for the telescope though you may need some kind of coupling to fix the camera to the telescope, however you will probably want a tripod for your camera anyway to get some wide star trail or night shots. Mibbies someone with a bit more experience than myself in this area could advise you better.

The 10-22mm I'm pretty sure would be good for some night shots of stars, however you can learn the basics with the wide end of your kit lens and by the time you have worked out how to use that the way you want you'll have a better idea of how your kit limits you and have a better idea of what and how you need to upgrade. As in a lot of photography kit is only part of the answer, a lot is down to technique and how you use your gear.

 

[weepete]

In fact here is a great night shot with stars that was posted on here

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...6053-milky-way-panorama-over-sandwich-nh.html

 

[ReInvented2012]

In fact here is a great night shot with stars that was posted on here http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/landscape-cityscape/356053-milky-way-panorama-over-sandwich-nh.html

Thanks for the tips man and for that link. I would love to make shots like that but don't know how to use photoshop to put multiple images together. I guess I can learn all that in due time. Tripod first, then a new lens, then a telescope.

 

[lambertpix]

In fact here is a great night shot with stars that was posted on here

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...6053-milky-way-panorama-over-sandwich-nh.html

FWIW, that's the Tokina lens I mentioned earlier - the wider aperture isn't usually a big advantage during the day (vs. something like Canon's 10-22), but at night, the extra speed can help keep exposure time quick enough to avoid star trails.

 

[Civchic]

I think we are very similar in both our needs and our means! I'm just a couple months ahead of you. I have a T3, the 50mm 1.8 and the 55-250 IS. I'm very happy with all of them for the price I paid. I love birds, and I can get pretty good shots of big birds that aren't too far away, and moderately fine shots of little birds that I sneak up on with the 55-250. Someday I will want to extend my reach but for now I have more important things to spend my money on. The 50mm is good for indoor shooting (kids, family, etc) and at aquariums or other dark places. I'm thinking of adding a wide-angle lens to the repertoire but it's not as urgent as those two (for what I like to shoot).

They are definitely low-cost lenses, but not in a terribly frustrating limiting way.

 

[ReInvented2012]

I think we are very similar in both our needs and our means! I'm just a couple months ahead of you. I have a T3, the 50mm 1.8 and the 55-250 IS. I'm very happy with all of them for the price I paid. I love birds, and I can get pretty good shots of big birds that aren't too far away, and moderately fine shots of little birds that I sneak up on with the 55-250. Someday I will want to extend my reach but for now I have more important things to spend my money on. The 50mm is good for indoor shooting (kids, family, etc) and at aquariums or other dark places. I'm thinking of adding a wide-angle lens to the repertoire but it's not as urgent as those two (for what I like to shoot). They are definitely low-cost lenses, but not in a terribly frustrating limiting way.

I definitely think it's best for me to start simple with the 70/300mm rather than going big immediately to a 400mm or 600mm. It'll cost more in the long run but gotta work with what I can afford right. There is just too much awesome equipment out there for so many different things. Peace.

 

[Civchic]

I definitely think it's best for me to start simple with the 70/300mm rather than going big immediately to a 400mm or 600mm. It'll cost more in the long run but gotta work with what I can afford right. There is just too much awesome equipment out there for so many different things. Peace.

Also, as long as you take care of them, lenses have a good resale value, even the cheaper ones. So you may be able to get most of your money back out of them when and if you decide to step up.

 

[ReInvented2012]

I definitely think it's best for me to start simple with the 70/300mm rather than going big immediately to a 400mm or 600mm. It'll cost more in the long run but gotta work with what I can afford right. There is just too much awesome equipment out there for so many different things. Peace.

Also, as long as you take care of them, lenses have a good resale value, even the cheaper ones. So you may be able to get most of your money back out of them when and if you decide to step up.

That is what I have heard that about lens resale value which is why I am fine getting a decent lens instead of jumping to top of the line. I have been reselling all sorts of things recently on ebay and I was surprised at how easy it was.

Were your bird pics on flickr taken with the 55/250mm? They are exactly what I am looking to do, so Im thinking the 70/300mm will keep me satisfied for a while.

 

[Gavjenks]

That is what I have heard that about lens resale value which is why I am fine getting a decent lens instead of jumping to top of the line.

Keep in mind that this only works if you buy used. Otherwise you eat the new vs. used price difference yourself with each exchange.

 

[lambertpix]

That is what I have heard that about lens resale value which is why I am fine getting a decent lens instead of jumping to top of the line. I have been reselling all sorts of things recently on ebay and I was surprised at how easy it was.

Give a look at refurbished lenses, too -- this will slice some of the "new lens" premium off list price while assuring you the lens has been at least looked at by a technician. I've purchased a couple Canon refurbs with good results - they come with a 90-day warranty, as well, which is a step up from used.

FWIW, I haven't tried calculating this, but it seems as if higher-end glass holds its value better than entry-level stuff.

 

[ReInvented2012]

That is what I have heard that about lens resale value which is why I am fine getting a decent lens instead of jumping to top of the line. I have been reselling all sorts of things recently on ebay and I was surprised at how easy it was.

Give a look at refurbished lenses, too -- this will slice some of the "new lens" premium off list price while assuring you the lens has been at least looked at by a technician. I've purchased a couple Canon refurbs with good results - they come with a 90-day warranty, as well, which is a step up from used.

FWIW, I haven't tried calculating this, but it seems as if higher-end glass holds its value better than entry-level stuff.

I was also looking into the refurbished lenses, I like the warranty deal and I feel the dealer or seller is more trustworthy than the average joe on Amazon or ebay. (no offense to anyone selling anything there of course, I know I do).

 

[Civchic]

Were your bird pics on flickr taken with the 55/250mm? They are exactly what I am looking to do, so Im thinking the 70/300mm will keep me satisfied for a while.

Yes, they were. It's a trade off for me. I can't afford the big fast glass yet, so I have to get pretty close to my birds, and they have to be pretty big. Hence a lot of waterfowl, not a lot of songbirds. Waterbirds are easier to approach, especially in the city.