[TheMarchingMule]

Okie doke, so just play around with the 50mm for awhile and see where I want to go from there?

I should order the XSi soon...

 

[Samgotit]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMarchingMule /img/forum/go_quote.gif Okie doke, so just play around with the 50mm for awhile and see where I want to go from there? I should order the XSi soon...

You certainly can. The 50 is great, but you will find it limiting as your only lens. On a crop body it's equivalent to an 80mm lens; that's kind of long. Having a wide zoom is invaluable.

If you don't want to spend extra on the Tamron right now, I'd highly suggest you get the XSi with the lens kit. The difference in price is $90 and from what I read and what I've seen from my podna's, it a very good lens and well worth it. Again, you can sell the kit lens for more than $90 when and if you feel the need. The kit lens goes for about 150 used. I can't imagine a reason not to get it for 90 bucks.

 

[TheMarchingMule]

Alrighty, I just ordered the XSi kit off amazon.com with two-day shipping.

Now I gotta run; I have to meet that seller to grab that 50mm lens!

 

[some1x]

Only went through first two pages. Can't believe no one recommended Pentax. My first DSLR was Nikon D40. I loved its ergonomics, but it doesn't grow very well and upgradtitis hit quick! It is not worth buying a DSLR if you only use the kit 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 lenses. For ~$1000, I'd get:

Pentax K10D ($650) and one of the following lenses

Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 ($350)
Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 Macro ($420)
Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 ($420)
Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 ($350)
Pentax 16-45mm F4 ($320)

You get in-body image stabilization and pentaprism viewfinder, which are not found in D40/D40x/D60/XTi/XSi, etc. Image quality is equal or better than Canikon offerings, as long as you are using raw. Pentax is starting to fill their zoom lens line up too, so that is no longer much of a disadvantage. You also get a GREAT selection of Pentax prime lenses.

FA 50mm F1.4
DA limited series 35mm/40mm/70mm
FA limited series 31mm/43mm/77mm
FA* 85mm/1.4


----- edit -----
Congrats on getting the XSi

 

[M0T0XGUY]

Quote:

Originally Posted by some1x /img/forum/go_quote.gif Only went through first two pages. Can't believe no one recommended Pentax. My first DSLR was Nikon D40. I loved its ergonomics, but it doesn't grow very well and upgradtitis hit quick! It is not worth buying a DSLR if you only use the kit 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 lenses. For ~$1000, I'd get: Pentax K10D ($650) and one of the following lenses Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 ($350) Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 Macro ($420) Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 ($420) Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 ($350) Pentax 16-45mm F4 ($320) You get in-body image stabilization and pentaprism viewfinder, which are not found in D40/D40x/D60/XTi/XSi, etc. Image quality is equal or better than Canikon offerings, as long as you are using raw. Pentax is starting to fill their zoom lens line up too, so that is no longer much of a disadvantage. You also get a GREAT selection of Pentax prime lenses. FA 50mm F1.4 DA limited series 35mm/40mm/70mm FA limited series 31mm/43mm/77mm FA* 85mm/1.4 ----- edit ----- Congrats on getting the XSi Consider one of the suggested lenses, at least. Don't get the Canon 50mm/1.8. The Canon 50mm/1.4 is much better and worth the price difference.

For now at least, however, Pentax is still lagging behind the major manufacturers in terms of lens availability; even if they plan to expand production as much as you claim. Still, I admit that I gave Pentax a long, hard look when I bought my first SLR, and there's no doubt that they make some good cameras and nice lenses.

EDIT: The OP's picking up the 50 f/1.8 as we speak. Personally, I've seen some great shots from it, and in terms of resolution its hard to find fault for $65.

 

[TheMarchingMule]

Yuppers, I just got back; the seller was really nice and friendly to chat with, and now I'm making room on my office desk so both my audio and photography hobbies can rest next to me. The "nifty fifty" lens is in perfect condition, and so is the reverse ring, but I'm not quite sure what I'll do with these three filters.

I'm getting the XSi kit on Thursday, which is great, because I'm getting a shot tomorrow (and I am scared stiff when it comes to them), so I'm looking at the XSi as my reward for living through tomorrow's ordeal.

So now I have a kit lens and a "nifty fifty." Am I well-rounded enough on the lower-end of the zoom spectrum to chase after that Canon EF-S 55-200mm now? I am going to a nice beach this summer, and I guess I can use it to snipe good shots from afar...or should I get a tripod instead?

 

[some1x]

Sorry, should have read the last page lol.

The 50/1.8 is a good lens compared to zoom lenses, but compared to other 50mm prime lenses. I just don't like its build quality. The Canon 50/1.8 is a Grado SR60 (better than stock headphones, plasticky build quality), where as the Zeiss 50/1.4 is a Grado HP-2 (sounds good and all metal build). Its a very good starting point though, and if you like the length, you can always resell without loss and pick up a Zeiss 50mm (manual only) or Canon 50/1.2 or 50/1.4.

 

[Sh0eBoX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMarchingMule /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yuppers, I just got back; the seller was really nice and friendly to chat with, and now I'm making room on my office desk so both my audio and photography hobbies can rest next to me. The "nifty fifty" lens is in perfect condition, and so is the reverse ring, but I'm not quite sure what I'll do with these three filters. I'm getting the XSi kit on Thursday, which is great, because I'm getting a shot tomorrow (and I am scared stiff when it comes to them), so I'm looking at the XSi as my reward for living through tomorrow's ordeal. So now I have a kit lens and a "nifty fifty." Am I well-rounded enough on the lower-end of the zoom spectrum to chase after that Canon EF-S 55-200mm now? I am going to a nice beach this summer, and I guess I can use it to snipe good shots from afar...or should I get a tripod instead?

I'd say don't go and buy a zoom lens right away. when you get your XSi and kit, play around with it and take a bunch of pictures. see how this range suits you, and that can help determine how well a telephoto will fit in your kit. if you always find yourself needing more zoom and having to take a few steps forward every time you shoot, then it would be a good idea to buy a nice telephoto. but for now just play around. if it turns out that you are really digging the range of the kit lens but the quality of it isn't proving to be enough, then you might consider upgrading that before buying a telephoto.

 

[some1x]

Quote:

Originally Posted by M0T0XGUY /img/forum/go_quote.gif For now at least, however, Pentax is still lagging behind the major manufacturers in terms of lens availability; even if they plan to expand production as much as you claim. Still, I admit that I gave Pentax a long, hard look when I bought my first SLR, and there's no doubt that they make some good cameras and nice lenses. EDIT: The OP's picking up the 50 f/1.8 as we speak. Personally, I've seen some great shots from it, and in terms of resolution its hard to find fault for $65.

Ultimately, it depends on which lenses you need. Canon and Nikon also have weaknesses in their lens line-ups that are not filled by 3rd party manufacturers. The Pentax limited lenses are very special in their portability (especially the DA pancakes), build quality, and rendering. I love the limited lenses, and most of them have no equals from Canikon.

 

[Samgotit]

What Shoe said. Take delivery of your stuff, shoot for a month and by that time you'll know if want a longer lens.

Good on you for making an informed decision, but not getting bogged down in the soupy hogwash that surrounds digital photography.

 

[roastpuff]

Congrats! I think you'll really like the XSi/kit lens combo to start with - that kit lens is pretty decent, and it's great to start off with.

Do remember that you have a "physical zoom mechanism" already built into your body - aka your feet - to use with the lenses in question.

Also, look into the EF-S 55-250 IS... I've never heard of the EF-S 55-200? I know of an EF version, but not EF-S. Supposedly it's not that good in build quality or optical quality, either, so I'd rather go with a Sigma APO 70-300 as my zoom.

EDIT: And I find that I'm really, really hankering for a 28-135 IS for my walkabout.

 

[Sh0eBoX]

^ the 28-135 IS has good range and IS and all... but i'm very hard-pressed to recommend it to anyone as a walkaround due to a few things:

1) it's slow! f/3.5-5.6 is very limiting IMO (same as kit lens except it stays <5.6 for a greater range obviously). even with IS I feel like it wouldn't be very capable unless you had a decent amount of available light.

2) widest is 28mm (effectively 44.8mm with 1.6x crop factor) --- this may not be a problem to some but I find that I have a lot of shots that are in the <28mm range. sometimes you will be able to take a few steps back to fit everything in the frame but there are a lot of times when you just can't either.

3) chromatic abberation. this lens seems to be reported to have a lot of problems with CA.

for the price point of this lens, i feel like the sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 or the tamron 17-50 f/2.8 are much better alternatives. fast, extremely sharp, and give you 9mm more on the wide end (which I find more valuable than extra mm on the telephoto end).

this is just me though... i know there are still a fair share of users who are more than happy with their 28-135s

 

[roastpuff]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sh0eBoX /img/forum/go_quote.gif ^ the 28-135 IS has good range and IS and all... but i'm very hard-pressed to recommend it to anyone as a walkaround due to a few things: 1) it's slow! f/3.5-5.6 is very limiting IMO (same as kit lens except it stays <5.6 for a greater range obviously). even with IS I feel like it wouldn't be very capable unless you had a decent amount of available light.

Well, I'm using 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 right now and it's not exactly a "fast" lens, either... the IS would compensate for that drop in aperture, I think.
Quote:

2) widest is 28mm (effectively 44.8mm with 1.6x crop factor) --- this may not be a problem to some but I find that I have a lot of shots that are in the <28mm range. sometimes you will be able to take a few steps back to fit everything in the frame but there are a lot of times when you just can't either.

Ok, this is true.
Quote:

3) chromatic abberation. this lens seems to be reported to have a lot of problems with CA.

Haven't heard about that... only in certain situations (i.e. high-contrast) or in general use?

Quote:

for the price point of this lens, i feel like the sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 or the tamron 17-50 f/2.8 are much better alternatives. fast, extremely sharp, and give you 9mm more on the wide end (which I find more valuable than extra mm on the telephoto end). this is just me though... i know there are still a fair share of users who are more than happy with their 28-135s

Hm, well, since I managed to snag my 28-105 for 130USD I think I'll either sell it a tad higher or keep it, since it's not THAT expensive, as a walkabout right now.

 

[Sh0eBoX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by roastpuff /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, I'm using 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 right now and it's not exactly a "fast" lens, either... the IS would compensate for that drop in aperture, I think.

IS can compensate for the aperture if you are taking still shots... but also keep in mind that if there is movement then IS doesn't really do anything for you there. that's where you need a faster aperture so that you can get a shutter speed that will stop the motion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by roastpuff /img/forum/go_quote.gif Haven't heard about that... only in certain situations (i.e. high-contrast) or in general use?

I have heard that it is worse than the average lens for CA but there are people who aren't bothered by it. so it's a mixed bag here. usually not enough to deter people from the lens on its own.

Quote:

Originally Posted by roastpuff /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hm, well, since I managed to snag my 28-105 for 130USD I think I'll either sell it a tad higher or keep it, since it's not THAT expensive, as a walkabout right now.

yeah if you are okay with that lens then i say there's no need to get rid of it. but if you do decide to upgrade and are still considering dropping $300 on the 28-135... i would recommend thinking about getting the tamron 17-50 (great build quality, f/2.8 all the way through, very very sharp) or the sigma 17-70 (fast, f/2.8-4.5, very sharp, greater range than the tamron) --- unless of course you find the extra reach more beneficial (but don't forget about the 9mm on the wide end... that could be more handy than the reach, as reach can be simulated via cropping if you have no room to step forward, while you can't add extra image to make it wider if you can't step back

)

 

[roastpuff]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sh0eBoX /img/forum/go_quote.gif IS can compensate for the aperture if you are taking still shots... but also keep in mind that if there is movement then IS doesn't really do anything for you there. that's where you need a faster aperture so that you can get a shutter speed that will stop the motion.

True, but at least it compensates for handshake when taking pictures at night.
Quote:

yeah if you are okay with that lens then i say there's no need to get rid of it. but if you do decide to upgrade and are still considering dropping $300 on the 28-135... i would recommend thinking about getting the tamron 17-50 (great build quality, f/2.8 all the way through, very very sharp) or the sigma 17-70 (fast, f/2.8-4.5, very sharp, greater range than the tamron) --- unless of course you find the extra reach more beneficial (but don't forget about the 9mm on the wide end... that could be more handy than the reach, as reach can be simulated via cropping if you have no room to step forward, while you can't add extra image to make it wider if you can't step back )

Well, when I have a job then we'll see.

Lenses in Singapore are also more expensive than in North America at the moment, so I'll probably shop more seriously when I get back to Vancouver.