New Camera or New Lenses?

PhotoJunkieJen · Dec 18, 2008

The Sigma 10-20 is definitely on my short list.

I'm wondering if anyone has any suggestions for a good low light lens? I've read the Canon 28mm - 135mm IS is pretty good there.

Most of the time, I feel like I'd be able to use flash... but there are certain instances it's just not feasible.

PhotoJunkieJen · Dec 18, 2008

uplander said:
Wide angle /walk around Tamron 18-200 ( this lens overlaps and is next in line to be replaced,It was my first lens)

The reviews on this thing are incredible! Definitely going on my wishlist for a good "all around" lens.

table1349 · Dec 18, 2008

Sorry, but I am going to be a fly in the ointment here because based on you question I am going to tell you neither.

Top quality glass is a pleasure to use. I have a whole slew of L glass from a 35 f1.4L to the 400 f2.8L. But it does not make the photograph. I have owned or used everything from the Rebel series up through the xD series. The upper end bodies are a pleasure to use, but again they do not make the photograph.

Instead I am going to suggest that you go out with what you have, learn to use it to it's fullest potential, to where it is limiting your photography and YOU know why and how it is limiting your photography. At that point you won't be asking us this question because you will know the answer. At that point your questions will be more in line with, "I need an fast wide angle lens and have decided on either the Canon 16-35 f2.8L or the Tamron 17-50 f2.8. Is the build quality and optical quality worth the $900.00 difference?"

If you need a different focal length, then that is another matter. That is an issue to address if you have that need for longer or wider.

Improving your photography however starts with the photographer. Improving the technical aspect of the photograph can be equipment and that is the time for the change, when you know the difference.

AlexColeman · Dec 18, 2008

Glass will last you ten years, the camera body 1 year before utter obsolescence.

PhotoJunkieJen · Dec 19, 2008

On a similar note, how much of the clarity lies in the lens... and how much of the clarity/sharpness of a picture lies in the camera itself?

One of the things I'm seeking is sharper shots when I autofocus.

Overread · Dec 19, 2008

my experinces tell me that it lies more in the lens that in the body - however its not as simple as that.
Auto focusing is improved with better bodies and also better glass - higher quality lenses tend to have better autofocusing motors in them; offer a wider max aperture so there is more light to autofocus with; and some also have built in image stabalization which helps remove camers shake at slower shutter speeds/
However a better body will affect af as well - with better AF sensors and programs

But sharpness lies more with the lens than the camera in the end (at least I have seen this to be the case). A top range lens on bottom or a top range camera has far greater potential to deliver sharper results than if you were to put a low quality lens on a top range camera.

Seriously you only have a kit lens at the moement - diverisfy and get some more and better glass - you will find it gives a new lease of life to a camera

reg · Dec 19, 2008

yes IMO a rebel is a fine camera body for any beginner/amateur. It's no 1Ds but it's not a horrible camera.

GET BETTER GLASS NOW!

PhotoJunkieJen · Dec 19, 2008

I'm shopping for deals on that Tamron 18-200 for a general all around lens as we speak.

Hopefully a sigma to follow. Man, I need a better job or cheaper hobbies. :lmao:

Joves · Dec 19, 2008

PhotoJunkieJen said:
On a similar note, how much of the clarity lies in the lens... and how much of the clarity/sharpness of a picture lies in the camera itself?

One of the things I'm seeking is sharper shots when I autofocus.

Glass is the king in this case. Cheap glass on a 5K camera will hamper any resolution the body has. Good glass will maximize your cameras ability.

PhotoJunkieJen · Jan 8, 2009

So I found a decent deal on a Tamron 28-75... Is there any way to tell, short of trusting the seller here, if it's Grey Market?

Also, any recommendations for a good wide angle that's slightlyyy less expensive than the Sigma?

Tighearnach · Jan 9, 2009

Hi

I have the Rebel 400D and was faced with the same dilemma 12 months ago. I went with Glass over upgrading to the 40D and am glad that I did.

I bought the Canon 50mm 1.8, Canon 70-200 f/4 and the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 (over time)

I am really happy with all the lenses. The 70-200 is incredible for the price i paid and the 50mm is just an absolute bargain and I think should be the first lens you buy. The Sigma serves as a great walkabout lens and again delivers good image quality considering the price paid.

I dont know anything about that 18-200 you were looking at but I would be wary of any lens that has such a broad focal length.

However I also understand your desire for the 40D. I think the Rebels really fall down when it comes to high ISO use and I personally would like both my current lenses and the 40D but still do not regret going for glass over body.

Save the pennies and buy good glass......

maulrat · Jan 9, 2009

PhotoJunkieJen said:
I'm shopping for deals on that Tamron 18-200 for a general all around lens as we speak.

Tighearnach said:
I dont know anything about that 18-200 you were looking at but I would be wary of any lens that has such a broad focal length.

If the Tamron 18-200 produces photos as nice as the Sigma 18-200mm OS, then I would go with it for a walk around lens. I think its worth every penny I spent on it. The way I see it, once I got a broad focal range covered pretty decently (with my 18-200), then I can start working on lesser broad focal lengths with expensive and fast pro glass.