What prime is best for my T3?

[tkruger]

I took the advice given and tried my 18-55 and 75-300 for a while to see what I may need. What I have found is that most of my indoor photos were taken between 22 and 35mm. I often go on trips where no flash is allowed and am looking for a lenses that works better in low light. Auto focus is preferred. Used is an option.

I have looked at a few lenses, a 40 f2.8 and a 50 f1.8. My budget is close to $100. How are these? Are there any other good options in this price range used or new? I would prefer something around 22 -28 mm but cannot find any in my budget with AF. I have a Canon T3.

 

[JohnTrav]

The 50mmf/1.8 is a good lens. Plenty of people I know have it and love it. Great lens for the price.

 

[Dao]

If budget is around $100, I will choose the EF 50mm f/1.8.

 

[wyogirl]

Nifty 50 is what I would choose with your budget... you can't, IMO, get a better lens with $100.

 

[Gavjenks]

The 50mm for sure.
There are also like 30 billion 28mm vintage lenses, if you can handle manual focus. Canon is very adaptible to other company's lenses. Pentax, for example, very available glass, you can get adapters for like $5, and a decent 28mm 2.8 or so for maybe $40. (might require a tiny bit of angle grinding to cut the little tab that opens the aperture up. DOesn't affect your ability to control aperture from the barrel, but does hit the mirror potentially.)

 

[Derrel]

WHat Gavjenks says is true...Canon EOS is VERY adaptable. m42 thread mount lenses, often referred to as "Pentax Screw Mount" lenses, are plentiful. A good number of those have an AUTO-Manual lens diaphragm button or slider switch that opens the lens to FULL-open, and also closes the lens down to whatever f/stop value is set on the aperture control ring.

The cheap, China-made adapters from eBay seem to work acceptably in my experience. The 55mm f/1.8 and f/2 Super-Takumars are like $20 lenses. I bought an off-brand yet still pretty good 1970's 35mm f/2.8 for $12 at a garage sale. I got an Olympus OM-series 28mm f/2.8 for $42 at a pawn shop. All pretty decent. The most disconcerting problem as I see it is that in low-light, wide-angle manual focus lenses are tricky to focus...so tricky that many frames would be junkers in many situations. You want something that really DOES NOT exist, except for the Canon 50 EF-II.

 

[Big Mike]

My budget is close to $100.

The above mentioned EF 50mm F1.8 is slightly above that, and is the least expensive lens in the line up. Even on the used market, you won't find much for $100 unless you go with old manual focus lenses and some sort of adapter.

Hey, we've all been there...I understand. But sooner or later you'll probably come to the realization that the cheapest options are far, far from the best options...and we often end up replacing them sooner or later. So in the long run, it may be more expensive to always be buying the cheapest gear.
So the wise thing to do, would be to save up until you can afford a better option, that you will end up using for a longer time. Easier said than done, I know...but I think it's worth mentioning.

 

[vimwiz]

My budget is close to $100.

Even on the used market, you won't find much for $100 unless you go with old manual focus lenses and some sort of adapter.

Frankly, the old FD lenses are still not very cheap (I guess on account of being much more solid) , but thats besides the point - dont use a FD->EF adapter at all, to try and use old glass. I tried one and it wouldnt focus to infinity, the quality sucked, and it needed more light. I guess a good one with corrective optics would probably cost as much as the lens.

 

[Carolyn0219]

I'm joining in this conversation because I have almost the same question as the original poster. I'd like to hear from Big Mike, this was kinof a follow-up to his response.

I'm choosing between the Canon U.S.A. : Consumer & Home Office : EF 50mm f/1.4 USM and the Canon U.S.A. : Consumer & Home Office : EF 50mm f/1.8 II for my Canon T3i

I understand that the first one is better quality, which you recommend and I understand. It has a higher aperture and faster autofocus. The only downfall to me is that it weighs over 10 ounces. That seems like a lot. I really want something that I can carry around for fairly long periods of time. With my 18-55mm kit lens, I have trouble with the flash wanting to come on when I cannot use a flash, so they are both better in that regard. Can you tell me anything about the actual noticeable difference between having an f1.4 versus an f1.8? Is the USM that much better than the micromotor?

The only other option was the Canon U.S.A. : Consumer & Home Office : EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro. I considered this because I eventually want a macro and this can be a macro with a converter, but otherwise the lens doesn't seem as nice overall.

Any advice is greatly appreciated! This is my first time posting in any forum, literally ANY forum, ever, so I hope I am getting the etiquette right.