8 replies to this topic

[Vision#]

So like a week ago, i went out in a 15ms wind and decided to try out how my camera films, and soon enough my camera stand was pushed over and i had my lens in 2 pieces.
Well shit happens i guess, and im buying a new lens, but now i have to get advice on which lens is the best buy

ef 28-90mm f4.0-f5.6 III - 25e
Sigma 18-50 F2,8 DC + Hoya uv filter - 210e
Canon EFs 18-55 IS - 70e
Canon 90-300mm F4.5-5.6 USM - 190e
Sigma 18-200 OS - 265e
Canon EF-S 17-85/4,0-5,6 IS USM - 225e

pretty much lenses i can buy and the cost behind which i can get them, and my budget is around 250 , more i cannot spend, the 200mm is the last line for the price, anyway what you guy think i should get me?

Edited by Vision#, 02 June 2011 - 14:05.

[Chyros]

You should ask Stinger, he's a professional photographer.

[Wizard]

Chyros, on 2 Jun 2011, 11:29, said:

You should ask Stinger, he's a professional photographer.

That is why I directed him to a thread here rather than just ask me on Steam. You could go and get Stinger to post now

[Stinger]

Can I ask why you are not replacing your previously owned lens, the one that was broken? What do you film exactly? Do you need a lens that's good in low light...?

I think you should make your decision based on focal length, on how close or far away you need to be from your subject.

Since you listed EF-S lenses, I must presume you are using a camera with 1.6 crop factor. The first lens you listed there would be roughly 50-150 on a crop body. That would be too long if you need a lens with a wide field of view.

If you narrow your selection down, I'll give you links to threads that will help you make up your mind. When deciding which new lens to buy, nothing helps more in decision making than a sample photo archive.

Edited by Stinger, 02 June 2011 - 21:51.

[Vision#]

I previously used Canon EFs 18-55 IS, when searching myself i new one, i found that i could get a wider range of lenses, as that before was standard lens with my 60D.
I guess close distance is fine, as i like taking more close up macro shots, closer i can focus the better, tho if im getting only 1 lens taking macro lens would make my pictures go variety down ? Also on that low light, little bit before the lens broke i found it kind of disturbing that i couldn't make a picture in the evening after rain, so ability making pictures in low light would be good but not that necessary as i usually take pictures in the morning.
I really have little idea about lenses so far, cause i got my Canon lil while back only and was before on digital camera for 5 years. So thats why i need help from someone who knows about it, otherwise im gonna make decision that is bad.
finally what i was filming, just simple shots of sea and on the local castle over the moat, wanted to use them to try out timelapse, as i have been fond of it for quite while and never got myself shots that i could use like that.

[Wizard]

The short answer to the question can be found here, in his photography thread

[Vision#]

I also updated the pictures with some new ones. As for now.

Edited by Vision#, 02 June 2011 - 23:38.

[Vision#]

Sorry for Double post, Is the 18-55 mm worth getting back and saving the money for macro lens, that i can have later if not now ?

[BeefJeRKy]

That Sigma 18-50 is your best choice IMO if only for the brighter aperture. I wouldn't get the 18-200 because lenses with such large range tend to suffer. The 90-300mm will only give you a very tight angle of view. The 28-90 is a full frame lens and is probably a little big for your camera. Since you're replacing your standard zoom, why not to move to something better? The Canon 17-85 is also a nice choice I suppose.