So many lenses, making the best choice based on pro's and con's of each lens

[RScottie]

I have been looking to replace or supplement my two kit lenses, the Canon EF-S 18-55 and the Canon EF 75-300. These lenses came with my Canon EOS Rebel T7.

As I look through the pictures I have been taking with this setup using both lenses, I have found them to be hit or miss in regards to the results I am seeking.

I compare my pictures to others and find that I am lacking mainly in sharpness but also other factors that these lenses are known to have an issue with.

I have managed to get good shots when I over-ride the auto features and set the aperture and shutter speed myself. I am still allowing the camera to pick ISO because, well, my background in film camera's, while some time back, tells me that the correlation between ASA speed on film does not really translate well to ISO with digital.

I also prefer manual focus as it appears I am faster than the focus on this camera even on servo mode.

I have narrowed my initial lens purchase to the focal length of 30 mm and have found a nice semi-used Sigma 30mm F1.4 Art DC HSM Lens.

I will use this lens as a general purpose "walk-around" lens at family gatherings, both indoors and out, as well as going to public gatherings like car shows, street fairs and even some landscapes and architecture.

I am not adverse to carrying a bag with alternate lenses if the need presents itself.

After this lens, I would like to get a multi-purpose medium zoom such at the original Canon 24-105 L series lens that has seen a good cost decrease since the newer version came out, or perhaps the Sigma 18-250.

There are just so many lenses out there and I'm sure I've missed a few good candidates.

Any pro's/con's with my thought process on getting new lenses or perhaps pro's/con's with the lenses I have mentioned?

 

[PhotoHobbyist]

Check out Christopher Frost lens reviews on Youtube. They helped me immensely.

Christopher Frost

Howdy everyone - my name is Christopher Frost, and on this channel you will find over 900 standardised reviews of all kinds of different camera lenses, as well as other videos about cameras, photography, and occasional Christian videos, too. Enjoy! Are you wanting to get in touch? IMPORTANT...

www.youtube.com

 

[smoke665]

I compare my pictures to others and find that I am lacking mainly in sharpness but also other factors that these lenses are known to have an issue with.

It would help to see some examples of the images you think are lacking in sharpness and include the settings. Some glass will be sharper than others, but there are also other things that contribute to lack of sharpness. IE: movement blur caused by to slow of a shutter speed for the subject or camera movement (hand held), being at either extreme of the lens aperture, camera grabbing focus on something other than your primary focus point (using multipoint focus rather than single point).

I also prefer manual focus as it appears I am faster than the focus on this camera even on servo mode.

Been at it a long time, and with rapidly changing focal points, there's no way I can manually focus faster than my cameras. That said, in low light conditions, there is a tendency for some AF modes to "hunt" for focus. If you're using the viewfinder, the T7 uses phase detection which is more accurate and faster, especially in low light. If you're using the back screen (live view) it uses contrast detection, slower and less accurate in low light. If you're using zone mode focus, it will average out the best focus across the frame so you might see some softness on areas you thought should be sharp, I generally use single spot focus. Finally, there should be a "continuous setting" on the focus, that once you grab focus it will track the subject and automatically adjust focus if they or the camera move.

Any pro's/con's with my thought process on getting new lenses or perhaps pro's/con's with the lenses I have mentioned?

You need to seriously consider what you'll be shooting the most of. My "walk around" favorite is an 18-135 f/3.5-5.6, sharp throughout, focal length covers most anything I need while out and about, and no need to carry a bag.

 

[RScottie]

Check out Christopher Frost lens reviews on Youtube. They helped me immensely.

Christopher Frost

Howdy everyone - my name is Christopher Frost, and on this channel you will find over 900 standardised reviews of all kinds of different camera lenses, as well as other videos about cameras, photography, and occasional Christian videos, too. Enjoy! Are you wanting to get in touch? IMPORTANT...

www.youtube.com

Thank you!

I have found him and subscribed and he is an excellent reviewer.

I do have to be careful though as the camera's he uses many times are full-frame and I have a crop.

But, If I am thinking correctly, I should get sharp images on my crop with lenses designed for full-frame that are sharp because my crop sensor will only have the middle section of the full frame shot and that is generally the sharpest area? Am I oversimplifying it?

In the end though, his video's have given me a list of considerations for lenses that is much larger than I have money for!

 

[RScottie]

It would help to see some examples of the images you think are lacking in sharpness and include the settings. Some glass will be sharper than others, but there are also other things that contribute to lack of sharpness. IE: movement blur caused by to slow of a shutter speed for the subject or camera movement (hand held), being at either extreme of the lens aperture, camera grabbing focus on something other than your primary focus point (using multipoint focus rather than single point).


Been at it a long time, and with rapidly changing focal points, there's no way I can manually focus faster than my cameras. That said, in low light conditions, there is a tendency for some AF modes to "hunt" for focus. If you're using the viewfinder, the T7 uses phase detection which is more accurate and faster, especially in low light. If you're using the back screen (live view) it uses contrast detection, slower and less accurate in low light. If you're using zone mode focus, it will average out the best focus across the frame so you might see some softness on areas you thought should be sharp, I generally use single spot focus. Finally, there should be a "continuous setting" on the focus, that once you grab focus it will track the subject and automatically adjust focus if they or the camera move.


You need to seriously consider what you'll be shooting the most of. My "walk around" favorite is an 18-135 f/3.5-5.6, sharp throughout, focal length covers most anything I need while out and about, and no need to carry a bag.

I prefer the viewfinder as it is not only difficult for me to hold the camera still with the arms away from the body and no IS on the big lens, it is also more difficult for me to see the details on the screen. I just see better through the viewfinder.

I intend to perfect my shots using manual mode, manual focus, and looking through the viewfinder. I will likely continue to let the camera pick the ISO and then judge the results accordingly.

I did look at the Canon EF-S 18-135 f3.5-5.6 STM but considering I have those focal lengths available between two lenses, I was thinking that a 30mm Prime would be a great addition and then eventually getting the 24-105 L Lens as everyone says they are better than the kit lenses. Both of those lens's have very good pictures that the poster's say they got with them.

Of course, they do not mention how much editing they had to do to get the shot to "pop" and be amazing.

I do not even want to get in to editing my pictures until I have squeezed every bit of good out of the lens with the settings I have available on the camera I have.

My thinking changes as I go and in the end, I will figure out each lens I get.

I have already been able to get pretty good shots out of the 75-300 non-IS kit lens that came with my bundle and, according to what I have read, about 75% of of the posts are very negative on this lens.

So, that gives me hope that any lens I get will be capable of good shots within it's known limitations.

I just don't want to get a real dud right out of the gate!

I thank you for the response and appreciate your knowledge.

 

[smoke665]

prefer the viewfinder as it is not only difficult for me to hold the camera still with the arms away from the body and no IS on the big lens, it is also more difficult for me to see the details on the screen. I just see better through the viewfinder.

I choose what works best for the shot. Hand held it could be viewfinder or live view it depends on circumstance. For street shots i use the tilt back screen because its less conspicuous,. In studio on tripod it's liveview (teathered).

intend to perfect my shots using manual mode, manual focus, and looking through the viewfinder. I will likely continue to let the camera pick the ISO and then judge the results accordingly.

Again, how sharp your shots can be affected by things other than the glass. I know with the camera on a tripod, I can manual focus on something in the viewfinder, switch to liveview/magnify and see the focus point isn't as sharp or exactly where I thought it was. In the old days with the split prism, if the line matches you had focus, not an option in today's cameras. The way to test your equipment is to do a focus test. You can go here to download a focus chart to test Squit Photo just make sure your camera and target are stationary.

do not even want to get in to editing my pictures until I have squeezed every bit of good out of the lens with the settings I have available on the camera I

The non-editing myth is bogus, to reach the top tier requires editing. Back in the film era, we edited post in the darkroom, today the options are easier and expanded. The thing to remember is to start with the best base image you can. Editing time is best spent improving shots, not correcting mistakes in exposure.

thinking changes as I go and in the end, I will figure out each lens I get.

This is why I suggested you really think about your end game. As you've already discovered, quality glass is expensive. Buying into camera is like taking a wife, you take it home it's yours, you decide you dont like it or want a new one it'll cost you. I have several thousand invested in equipment accumulated over many years, that is all compatible.

 

[PhotoHobbyist]

Thank you!

I have found him and subscribed and he is an excellent reviewer.

I do have to be careful though as the camera's he uses many times are full-frame and I have a crop.

But, If I am thinking correctly, I should get sharp images on my crop with lenses designed for full-frame that are sharp because my crop sensor will only have the middle section of the full frame shot and that is generally the sharpest area? Am I oversimplifying it?

In the end though, his video's have given me a list of considerations for lenses that is much larger than I have money for!

Frost has several "shoot out" comparisons of lens specially for APS cropped sensors. In his lens reviews he often mentions how a lens will behave on a full frame vs. cropped sensor as he tests with both cameras. He covers best budget lens and expensive lens too. Whatever you are looking for he has probably reviewed it. Before going $$$$ for an L series lens, you might want to consider his top budget favorites.

 

[RScottie]

Frost has several "shoot out" comparisons of lens specially for APS cropped sensors. In his lens reviews he often mentions how a lens will behave on a full frame vs. cropped sensor as he tests with both cameras. He covers best budget lens and expensive lens too. Whatever you are looking for he has probably reviewed it. Before going $$$$ for an L series lens, you might want to consider his top budget favorites.

I agree, he is very thorough and I like the way he presents his views.

That "old" Canon 24-105 L series lens is very discounted now on Amazon and Ebay since they came out with a newer version. Frost reviewed the "old" version some time ago and really liked it.

And, it seems like a steal for a premium L version lens that is very versatile.

I like to take photo's of local bands and think this would be a good lens to use for that purpose also.

Thank you for taking the time to respond.

I am learning a lot on this forum.

 

[PhotoHobbyist]

Be aware that EF are for full frame cameras and EF-S are for cropped cameras.
If you buy an EF L 24-105mm to use on cropped camera, multiple by 1.5x, so it would perform as a 36-157mm so not wide enough for many occasions. A Canon EF-S lens such as the 18-135mm or 15-85mm would give you that wide shot. Either of those combined with a Canon 55-250mm STM would cover most situations. Always good to get a wide prime lens also as primes can't be matched for sharpness.

 

[smoke665]

Always good to get a wide prime lens also as primes can't be matched for sharpness.

Partially correct, a high quality zoom can match or even surpass a lower end prime, especially when stopped down to smaller apertures. Where good primes excel is in their sometimes unique rendering ability, typically wider apertures available, and less weight, but then again you aren't talking cheap for those high end primes, that's why many settle for a quality zoom that fills the range.

 

[KJ_North]

As Ken Rockwell says.....

Sharpness is the most overrated aspect of lens performance.

Lens sharpness seems like it ought to be related to making sharp photos, but it isn't.

Sales and marketing departments fuel this misconception because it scares people into buying new lenses. Sharpness is easy to test and analyze, so magazines oblige less experienced photographers with reams of colorful charts and graphs. People would make far better pictures if they spent time learning how to make great photos with what they already own instead of worrying about their tools.

Photographic lenses, used properly, have always been sharp, even at the dawn of photography in the 1840s. Optical design is a much older science than photography. The reasons some photos aren't sharp rarely have anything to do with the lens.