ChatterBank0 min ago
Canon EOS1000D Lens advice please....?
16 Answers
Hi guys, I have bought a Canon EOS 100D DSLR. The "package" 18-55 lens is very limited - even I'm finding that - and I'm a novice! Any advice on better lenses, I'm into ladscapes and street scenes, but would like to do some indoor/studio stuff too...?
Thanks in anticipation!!
Thanks in anticipation!!
Answers
1 to 16 of 16
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Woody23. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I'm assuming that the figures for your lens are '35mm equivalents', rather the true focal lengths, as that's fairly standard when describing the lenses on digital SLRs.
A cheapo fixed-focus camera typically has a lens of around 50mm. (Indeed that was the standard for many years, although more recent cameras often have lenses of around 40 to 45mm). So your current zoom lens does what a 'bog standard' lens would do, plus it's got quite a good 'wide angle' facility (down to 18mm) but almost no 'telephoto' capabilities whatsoever.
Studio photographers usually like to have lenses with focal lengths of no less than 80mm. (Filling the frame with someone's head with a 50mm lens results in distortion, making their nose look bigger than it should be. You need a lens where you can fill the frame with someone's head from further back). In the days of fixed-focus lenses (for conventional SLRs) most people would probably have opted for a 135mm lens for studio photography.
With your criteria you'd probably find that a lens covering something like 80mm to 150mm (or, at the most, 200mm) would meet most of your needs. Longer lenses are expensive, unwieldy and (unless you're into things like sports photography) probably unnecessary.
Chris
A cheapo fixed-focus camera typically has a lens of around 50mm. (Indeed that was the standard for many years, although more recent cameras often have lenses of around 40 to 45mm). So your current zoom lens does what a 'bog standard' lens would do, plus it's got quite a good 'wide angle' facility (down to 18mm) but almost no 'telephoto' capabilities whatsoever.
Studio photographers usually like to have lenses with focal lengths of no less than 80mm. (Filling the frame with someone's head with a 50mm lens results in distortion, making their nose look bigger than it should be. You need a lens where you can fill the frame with someone's head from further back). In the days of fixed-focus lenses (for conventional SLRs) most people would probably have opted for a 135mm lens for studio photography.
With your criteria you'd probably find that a lens covering something like 80mm to 150mm (or, at the most, 200mm) would meet most of your needs. Longer lenses are expensive, unwieldy and (unless you're into things like sports photography) probably unnecessary.
Chris
Thanks guys. Just been looking at reviews etc. Found this : http://www.amazon.co....qid=1273499264&sr=1-1 . any thoughts?
Interestingly it seems that the focal length quoted for that lens is a 'true' one, rather than the '35mm equivalent' I would have expected. Clicking 'see more technical details' shows the '35mm equivalent' focal length (which I still like to work with after decades of using 35mm SLRs) to be 88-400mm. That's quite a long telephoto lens! At the shorter end it should be ideal for studio work, whereas the longer telephoto range would be good for amateur sports photography. (Despite the image stabilization offered by that lens, I'd still recommend using a tripod at the longer focal lengths). The maximum aperture size is reasonable, making depth-of-field control fairly easy. (A 'professional' lens might have a maximum aperture of f/2 but it would cost vastly more. f/5.6 is OK for an 'amateur' lens)
Chris
Chris
1 to 16 of 16
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.