Lenses for the Canon 500d

[j-digg]

Mindy, by IQ tharmsen meant Image quality . I actually have started myself off with my 18-55mm IS kit lens and the 2 lenses Samanax reccommends above. In my opinion, they are both good lenses to start off with. By no means are they top of the line products, but they are great to use while learning your new found hobby. The 50mm 1.8 is very fun to experiment with shallow depth of field, and since you're into outdoor photography the 55-250 is a relatively long lens. Also, both are very cheap ( when talking about price in terms of photography ) although some may say just save the money you would spend on these for some more quality glass down the line. Either path isn't a terrible decision in my eyes.

 

[TBE]

get a nikon d90

without wanting to hijack the thread, is it worth the upgrade from a D80 to a D90? I bought a D80 late last year and have read the D90 offers higher end specs as well as some new features like video etc.

 

[Mindy]

Mindy, by IQ tharmsen meant Image quality .

haha Thanks for the clarification.

I actually have started myself off with my 18-55mm IS kit lens and the 2 lenses Samanax reccommends above. In my opinion, they are both good lenses to start off with. By no means are they top of the line products, but they are great to use while learning your new found hobby. The 50mm 1.8 is very fun to experiment with shallow depth of field, and since you're into outdoor photography the 55-250 is a relatively long lens. Also, both are very cheap ( when talking about price in terms of photography ) although some may say just save the money you would spend on these for some more quality glass down the line. Either path isn't a terrible decision in my eyes.

I'm just looking to purchase one lens at the moment. Instead of the kit lens for the 500d I'm looking at the kit lens for the 50d. I have looked at and like the recommendations mentioned in this thread thus far, and have saved them in my "wish list" on amazon so that I can keep up with what I am looking at. I think the 28-135 would give me the coverage I need without starting out with two lenses.

But after looking at the 50mm 1.8 on amazon, it really looks good. I've saved that to my list also. And I've discovered the 50mm 1.4 USM and that looks good as well.

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[bigtwinky]

I borrowed a 28-135 from a friend a few months ago and it was a good lens. It worked well, decent focusing speed and the range was nice. The Image Quality wasn't as sharp as with the higher end lenses, but thats the trade off you get for the price.

If budget is a concern (as it is for most of us), you might want to have a look at the 3rd party lenses from Sigma and Tamron. Lots of reviews on here about them.

But if you just want to go with 1 lens for now and want to keep the price down, the 28-135 would be a good choice. You won't be doing that much wildlife photography with this lens though. For bird pictures, you'd want something 300+.

While all focal ranges can yield great pictures, you typically get a wide angle lens (10-24) to do lanscapes, cityscapes, street photos. You would get something in the 85-110 range to do portraits and people shots. You would get something in the 200-300 range to do sports. You would get something in the 300+ range to do wildlife.

All these numbers are ones for a full frame camera (ie - not a crop senso camera). The Rebel series (350d, 400d, 450d, 500d) and the prosumer series (20d, 30d, 40d, 50d) are all crop sensor cameras (ie using EF-S and EF lenses).

 

[Mindy]

Hi Budwinky, thanks for your post. Yes I do love birds. Since the beginning of this thread, I've been looking and learning, and I will probably go with the 28-135mm for starters. When I'm ready for a longer range lens, I'm thinking about the [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-300mm-4-5-6-Lens-Cameras/dp/B0007Y794O/ref=wl_it_dp?ie=UTF8&coliid=I2PYE2QA5OMF0E&colid=25UW18EFXNX60"]70-300[/ame]. But I am keeping my mind open and will continue to look at all the "angles"

Thanks again.

 

[wildcats]

While all focal ranges can yield great pictures, you typically get a wide angle lens (10-24) to do lanscapes, cityscapes, street photos. You would get something in the 85-110 range to do portraits and people shots. You would get something in the 200-300 range to do sports. You would get something in the 300+ range to do wildlife.

All these numbers are ones for a full frame camera (ie - not a crop senso camera). The Rebel series (350d, 400d, 450d, 500d) and the prosumer series (20d, 30d, 40d, 50d) are all crop sensor cameras (ie using EF-S and EF lenses).

Because the 500D is a crop sensor camera does that mean it won't need quite as long of a lens as a full frame camera? I'm still trying to fully comprehend the difference between the full frame and crops sensor. I understood it to mean that the full sensor is like that of a 35mm camera and the crop sensor cameras would take a smaller image than the full frame but make it SEEM like this is a longer reach on the lens. Is this correct? I'm basically wondering how the lens range for your above subjects would change, if they would, for a crop sensor camera?

 

[musicaleCA]

While all focal ranges can yield great pictures, you typically get a wide angle lens (10-24) to do lanscapes, cityscapes, street photos. You would get something in the 85-110 range to do portraits and people shots. You would get something in the 200-300 range to do sports. You would get something in the 300+ range to do wildlife.

All these numbers are ones for a full frame camera (ie - not a crop senso camera). The Rebel series (350d, 400d, 450d, 500d) and the prosumer series (20d, 30d, 40d, 50d) are all crop sensor cameras (ie using EF-S and EF lenses).

Because the 500D is a crop sensor camera does that mean it won't need quite as long of a lens as a full frame camera? I'm still trying to fully comprehend the difference between the full frame and crops sensor. I understood it to mean that the full sensor is like that of a 35mm camera and the crop sensor cameras would take a smaller image than the full frame but make it SEEM like this is a longer reach on the lens. Is this correct? I'm basically wondering how the lens range for your above subjects would change, if they would, for a crop sensor camera?

Without getting into the specific differences, since that is a multi-faceted issue I'm just too sick to deal with right now: Canon (APS-C), multiply by 1.6. Olympus (4/3), multiply by 2. Nikon (APS-C) and anything else (unless I'm forgetting something), multiply by 1.5.

 

[DennyCrane]

I recently purchased the 70-300mm IS USM lens for my T1i, and it's a terrific lens. Well worth the investment. I'd also recommend the kit lens to start with, then the 70-300, and maybe a 50mm prime.

 

[ssnxp]

Hmm.. interesting thread.
To the OP: I bought a 50D with the 28-135 that you're thinking of getting. I really have nothing to compare it to besides the kit lens that the T1i came with, since I owned that for a few days. In general, I find the 28-135 more versatile, of course.

I can see myself using it as my "walk around" lens for now, but I do see myself acquiring a close portrait prime for indoor/party shots (24mm, 28mm, 35mm, or 50mm?) and a better zoom (not even sure yet, those are damn expensive) to fill out the "extreme" ends of the spectrum. After I get a flash and all the other gear, I think.

I'll probably be stuck with the 50D kit lens (And HOPEFULLY a good wide angle prime) for a long while before I get that L zoom.