Budget Lenses (under $200.00 US)

[Saralonde]

Photography can be an expensive hobby and, bargain hunter that I am, I'm always looking for the best bang for my buck. Sure I'd love to own a bunch of Canon L lenses and a full frame camera, but I'm not rich or a pro photographer, just a serious amateur that wants a variety of lens options with decent optics at a price I can afford. So these are my choices of lenses to buy if you have a DSLR and little money left to expand your range. I have, or had, all of them.

I started with the Canon Rebel XT and the kit lens 18-55 mm. The kit lens is generally panned by a lot of people, but it is really a decent lens to start out with, particularly since it is less than $100.00 US. It is still the only wide angle lens I own.

1. Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II ($85.00 US) for Nikkon users Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D ($108.00 US)
Rating: 9/10
Pros: great for low light, lightweight and compact, sharp, ideal for portrait photography, nice background blur
Cons: plastic build, can focus slowly
Known as the "nifty fifty" or "thrifty fifty", this lens is sharp at 1.8 and even better at 2.8. Really a great lens to have in situations with low light, especially if you can't use a flash. With no zoom to depend on, this prime gives you a chance to develop your skills. I found myself being more careful about framing and perspective. A lot of people use this as their walk around lens, but it does have its limitations. I used this lens so often that when it broke I bought its big brother, 50mm f/1.4.

2. Sigma 70-300mmf/4-5.6 Macro APO DG (under $200.00 US) Must be the APO version ( Mounts for Canon, Nikon, Pentax and Minolta cameras)
Rating: 8/10
Pros: inexpensive, comes with a lens hood, can function as a macro (1:2), versatility
Cons: needs good light (can hunt for focus), soft above 200mm
If you want an inexpensive zoom lens, look no farther then this. It can be used for portraits, outdoor sports, and nature/macro photography. This lens is nice for trying out macro, even though it is not true macro which is 1:1, not the 1:2 this lens has. It can manage some outdoor sports, but if this is something you shoot a lot, a faster lens might be better.

If you are new to photography and not sure if you want a zoom or a prime lens, this is a low cost way to find out. Are there better lenses then these? Certainly, but there are not many for under $200.00. Of course there are other options. You could save money for a more expensive lens or buy used.

If anyone has a budget lens they would like to add or their own opinions about these lenses, please add to this thread.

Edit: Trying to post sample images from each lens, but encountering some problems at the moment.

[Nicole]

Quick note on the Nikon 50mm f/1.8, mine actually feels really well constructed compared to the kit lens (18-55mm) since it has a metal mount (the kit lens has plastic). Perhaps this accounts for the price difference between the Canon and Nikon lenses?

[Saralonde]

Very possible. The Canon lens has a toylike feeling. My 50 f/1.8 is much more substantial.

[Morca007]

I <3 my Nikkor 50mm.
It sees more use than anything else I own.

[Saralonde]

Wanted to add sample images from each lens.

Taken by my daughter Kayt, 1/60, 5.0, ISO 400:
http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w191/Saralonde_2007/MyrtleBeach055.jpg

1/60, 5.6, ISO400:
http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w191/Saralonde_2007/IMG_4467.jpg

1/250, 8.0, ISO400:
http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w191/Saralonde_2007/IMG_4491.jpg

[Saralonde]

Sample images of the 50mm f/1.8.

1/1000, 9.0, ISO 400:
http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w191/Saralonde_2007/MyrtleBeach019.jpg

Taken by my daughter's boyfriend. 1/500, 6.3. ISO 400:
http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w191/Saralonde_2007/MyrtleBeach053.jpg

Other samples here http://digital-photography-school.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1356&page=2 #20

[Saralonde]

Sample Pictures using Sigma 70-300mm Macro APO DG. All sharpened and cropped in Picasa.

1/100, 8.0, ISO 100, focal length 300mm:
http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w191/Saralonde_2007/IMG_4885.jpg

1/80, 5.6, ISO 100, focal length 300mm:
http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w191/Saralonde_2007/Zoo078.jpg

1/500, 5.6, ISO 200, focal lenth 263mm:
http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w191/Saralonde_2007/IMG_1662.jpg

Macro sample. 1/100, 5.0, ISO 100, focal length 214mm:
http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w191/Saralonde_2007/IMG_4435.jpg

[omega]

Thanks, this thread is a great resource and I'm sure it will help plenty of SLR users.

What is yellow glow from on the moon shot? Dirty lens?

[NaturesPixel]

while the sigma is soft as Saralonde states.. there is work around by shooting with aperture of f8-f11 but this means it must be a nice bright sunny day... AND a tripod is a MUST with the focal length at 300mm

both taken just other day with my sigma 70-300 APO

http://static.flickr.com/208/486266937_67a44ae2aa.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/naturespixel/486266937/)
http://static.flickr.com/199/486267021_afe0e5fcd9.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/naturespixel/486267021/)

[Saralonde]

Much better examples then mine! That bird is really nice.

[Dr. WooD]

The bird shot is nice, but I really love the shot of the bee.

[Murtasma]

What no Lens Baby :)

[Saralonde]

Nope, don't have one so I can't write a review:( . You've got one though, Murtasma. Why don't you write a review for us:) ?

[rachel_r]

I Love this thread!!! I hate trying to figure out how in sam hell i'm going to be able to afford these lenses...and then I don't know how to spend the money if I do happen to have any... Now I can add the 50mm to my list and it should tide me over....Thanks guys!

[wulf]

My investments in new glass to supplement the 18-55mm kit lens that came with my D40 have been done on a low budget - about £66 so far, including postage costs.

One of the "limitations" of the D40 is the very small range of lenses it will autofocus with but, if you are not afraid of doing things manually, you have many more options. I picked a Nikon E series 50mm f/1.8 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/wulf/tags/50mmf18e/) and a Raynox DCR-250 macro adapter (http://www.flickr.com/photos/wulf/tags/raynoxdcr250/) (follow links to see the shots I have taken - you can also see kit lens (http://www.flickr.com/photos/wulf/tags/1855mmf3556g), kit lens + Raynox (http://www.flickr.com/photos/wulf/tags/1855mmf3556g,raynoxdcr250/) and 50mm + Raynox (http://www.flickr.com/photos/wulf/tags/50mmf18e,raynoxdcr250/)).

Here is a shot that combines the two:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/246/516232753_e8d3cc9d51.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/wulf/516232753/)

Wulf

[janesa13]

I got this lens (http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=5&productNr=1927) as a free bonus for buying the D50 body. You can get it for about US$60 new.
It is compact and light. Performed well for me and it could very well be a versatile walk around lens.
One warning that this lens cannot be used with D40 if you want auto focus.

Sample image:
28mm 1/40 f/8
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/129/404195233_62f58e0ea8.jpg

[RandomConnections]

I'd love to have the Nikon 18-200 VR, but I'm just not sure I can afford it right now. Do any of you have experience with the Sigma or Tamron 18-200 zooms for Nikon?

[oriolhdz]

Thanks for your tips Saralonde.
As i told before, I'm going to purchase a new camera. Now I'm have trouble choosing lenses too lol. The only store I can go is bestbuy. Any lenses for the canon 350D or Nikon D40 you suggest, couse there are a lot of lenses and I dont know wich one is good or wich one is bad. My budget is between 200 and 300 usd for a lens.
By the other way. If i go for the Nikon D40X, the lens included with it, are they good?
I'll appreciate your opinions.
Thanks

[RandomConnections]

Oriolhdz,

You should be able to get a deal with either the Canon or the Nikon which includes the kit lens. That should get you started.

Best Buy does limit your options. Have you considered ordering online? Adorama (http://www.adorama.com) is quite reliable, as is B&H Photo. (http://www.bhphotovideo.com)

[Saralonde]

Thanks for your tips Saralonde.
As i told before, I'm going to purchase a new camera. Now I'm have trouble choosing lenses too lol. The only store I can go is bestbuy. Any lenses for the canon 350D or Nikon D40 you suggest, couse there are a lot of lenses and I dont know wich one is good or wich one is bad. My budget is between 200 and 300 usd for a lens.
By the other way. If i go for the Nikon D40X, the lens included with it, are they good?
I'll appreciate your opinions.
Thanks

Definitely consider ordering online as RandomConnctions suggests. Best Buy is ok, but overpriced and limited in choices. Check rsellerratings (http://www.resellerratings.com/) to find a reliable store with an inexpensive price. I found it at amazon http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Digital-18-55mm-3-5-5-6G-Zoom-Nikkor/dp/B000NOEDGK/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-1911184-1784759?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1181827768&sr=8-1 for only $699. Best Buy is $100 more.

I have not used a Nikon D40X so I can't testify personally to the ability of the kit lens (I assume that is what comes with the D40X). If it is like the Canon kit lens, it will be a decent if not spectacular lens that will help you learn how to use your camera and take acceptable shots for a low price. A kit lens adds less then $100 onto the price of the camera, so it's a pretty good deal.

[oriolhdz]

Thanks for your tips Saralonde and RandomConnections. I see your poitns. The problem I have is that i live in Mexico, so ordering through amazon or online can be a problem for legal imports. In the other hand i live just 200 Km away from Mcallen which is my best shot (near and prices). I know maybe Bestbuy is overpriced but its the only choice I know there. Just to give you an idea. The Nikon D40 cost like 11,500 pesos that is like 1000 USD and the Canon Rebel Xti cost 15,000 pesos that is like 1,500 USD so comparing prices (mexico vs bestbuy) its is my best deal. Although if you know another place in Mcallen where I can buy it, I will be this =))))))) happy to know it!
Thanks for the comments and support!

[Saralonde]

Wish I could help you with that. It can be tough in some countries to get a decent price. When you said Best Buy I made an assumption you were in the States. Don't worry; Best Buy is still a reputable dealer and that is the main point when you want to buy something that expensive.

[oriolhdz]

Hehehe, i know.. it can be really tough to get that price but there is nothing i can do but anyway with your comments and tips it would be a better and secure purchase that without it. Thanks :)

[wulf]

I am sure that the D40x has the same kit lens as the D40 - it's a good one. It seems widely regarded in the views I have read (often compared favourably to the default Canon offering at that level... although I don't know how impartial those reviews were) and has performed very well in my experience.

Wulf

[Andrew Ferguson]

I've got the Canon 50mm f/1.8 as well and you're right, it feels like a toy.

The older model, the Mk. I, had a metal housing and felt a lot sturdier. Well, from what I've been told. I've never actually handled the Mk. I myself.

I never really considered buying the Sigma 75-300. I've got a marked preference for lenses with shorter focal length ranges, like 24-70 or 70-200. I'm also finding myself becoming addicted to primes.

Photography's becoming an expensive habit, but I can quit anytime I want man... :P

[Saralonde]

Photography's becoming an expensive habit, but I can quit anytime I want man... :P

Keep telling yourself that...:D

[RandomConnections]

It's my wife that keeps reminding me how expensive it is!

At least now I don't have the expense of film processing.

[RonM]

I just bought this kit "Canon Digital Rebel XTi 10.1MP Digital SLR Camera Body (Black) + Tamron 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens + Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD Lens" from Amazon for $854.90. I dont know how these lenses match up to what have already been mentioned but I figured that they would get me started until I can afford something with better quality.

[Saralonde]

Ron, have fun with your new camera! Let us know how you like the two Tamrons.

[ladytx]

I have been looking at the Sony A100. Does anyone have any experience with this camera as compared to the Canon XTI or the Nikon D40X? It seems good to me that the stabilization is in the camera and not the lense and the Minolta Maxxum lenses fit it. How do ya'll feel about an extended warranty on the camera?

[pward]

enjoyed this thread.

would like input on two areas of particular interest on our campus. We recently acquired a Sony a100 and have had good results so far!

Need affordable lense recommendations for two common scenarios:

1) poorly lit gymnasium sports photography
2) Indoor grip and grin social events

Photographers come out of the wood work to take our soccer and outdoors stuff, but not as many volunteer for those tough inside shots!

----
Newie in Tennessee (really eating up the DPS:))
Our photo library:
http://harpethhall.smugmug.com/

[ryan s]

I just bought this kit "Canon Digital Rebel XTi 10.1MP Digital SLR Camera Body (Black) + Tamron 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens + Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD Lens" from Amazon for $854.90. I dont know how these lenses match up to what have already been mentioned but I figured that they would get me started until I can afford something with better quality.
If this is the same Tamron 28-80 that came with my camera, I wish you the best of luck. It worked fine until about a month and a half ago. It gave me Err 99 all the time (the fatal lens error :eek: ) and would bind severely at the 28 and 80mm positions. I ended up giving it away to a local person over Craigslist. Yes, giving away = free :p

Has anyone brought up the M42 mount manual focus lenses? There seem to be very few "misses" in the ranks of Zeiss, Takumar, Zuiko etc. Almost any lens can be used with an adapter from Contax to Exacta to Olympus mounts. I've got a SMC Tak 135/3.5 in the mail I bought for $38 shipped. What does Canon charge for a similar lens? Almost 300 big ones :rolleyes: You lose autofocus though...oh well...

[Ersa]

Saralonde, thanks for reviewing the lenses and putting up the pics to go with them...it makes deciding easy

[daylebo5]

2. Sigma 70-300mmf/4-5.6 Macro APO DG (under $200.00 US) Must be the APO version ( Mounts for Canon, Nikon, Pentax and Minolta cameras)
Rating: 8/10
Pros: inexpensive, comes with a lens hood, can function as a macro (1:2), versatility
Cons: needs good light (can hunt for focus), soft above 200mm
If you want an inexpensive zoom lens, look no farther then this. It can be used for portraits, outdoor sports, and nature/macro photography. This lens is nice for trying out macro, even though it is not true macro which is 1:1, not the 1:2 this lens has. It can manage some outdoor sports, but if this is something you shoot a lot, a faster lens might be better.


I'm assuming this does not AF with the Nikon d40...
any sigma lens with do AF ??

[wulf]

I'm assuming this does not AF with the Nikon d40...
any sigma lens with do AF ??
Off the top of my head, I think Sigma do a range of "HSM" lenses that do autofocus with the D40.

Wulf

[daylebo5]

Yup.. i actually just checked with one of the places.. he said the HSM ones are AF with the nikon D40... there was a 55-200mm HSM (http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3326&navigator=6)lens available.. I was actually looking for a 18-200 mm lens..

there are only 2 HSM lens available... 18-50mm and the above one.. but the prices where really good.. at least when compared to the nikkor ones..

I have't tried any sigma lens.. so I'm assuming they are good ones.. any comments ??

[matthewchj]

Most Sigma lenses that I have encountered are very good. I myself have the Sigma 10-20mm, and am very pleased with it. Very sharp, and has given me no problems at all. Of course, the lenses I have played with are all Canon mount, so...

[Trav-man]

Yup.. i actually just checked with one of the places.. he said the HSM ones are AF with the nikon D40... there was a 55-200mm HSM (http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3326&navigator=6)lens available.. I was actually looking for a 18-200 mm lens..

there are only 2 HSM lens available... 18-50mm and the above one.. but the prices where really good.. at least when compared to the nikkor ones..

I have't tried any sigma lens.. so I'm assuming they are good ones.. any comments ??

I have checked out the 18-200 Dii at my local Wolf Camera. I am a very novice photographer (it is more a mild hobby) and I thought it was a great lens for the money. I know it has it's limits, especially out at the far ends, but I doubt anyone but true professionals or hard core hobbists will even notice the little stuff. I know Sigma has the OS out for their 18-200, and I am trying to scour the reviews of this lens.

Just my two cents...

[daylebo5]

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II ($70.00 US) for Nikkon users Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D ($108.00 US)
Rating: 9/10
Pros: great for low light, lightweight and compact, sharp, ideal for portrait photography, nice background blur
Cons: plastic build, can focus slowly
Known as the "nifty fifty" or "thrifty fifty", this lens is sharp at 1.8 and even better at 2.8. Really a great lens to have in situations with low light, especially if you can't use a flash. With no zoom to depend on, this prime gives you a chance to develop your skills. I found myself being more careful about framing and perspective. A lot of people use this as their walk around lens, but it does have its limitations. I used this lens so often that when it broke I bought its big brother, 50mm f/1.4.

ok guys this might be a extremely dumb question...i'm kind mixed up with DOF and aperture right now... so pls excuse..
just want to confirm if i'm thinking right... with above lens , you won't be able to take landscape shots due to the low aperture setting.. am i right ??

[Digidave]

ok guys this might be a extremely dumb question...i'm kind mixed up with DOF and aperture right now... so pls excuse..
just want to confirm if i'm thinking right... with above lens , you won't be able to take landscape shots due to the low aperture setting.. am i right ??

Actually, yes you can. There is a long & complicated math formula to explain why. I can't figure it out & I believe most people wouldn't be able to either. The lens doesn't have a fixed aperture. The farther away the subject is, the smaller(larger number) the aperture gets. I just ordered the Nikkor 50mm f/1.4. The Aperture varies between 1.4-16. I'll see if I can get some landscapes for you this weekend.

[daylebo5]

Actually, yes you can. There is a long & complicated math formula to explain why. I can't figure it out & I believe most people wouldn't be able to either. The lens doesn't have a fixed aperture. The farther away the subject is, the smaller(larger number) the aperture gets. I just ordered the Nikkor 50mm f/1.4. The Aperture varies between 1.4-16. I'll see if I can get some landscapes for you this weekend.

oh ok.. so the aperture varies betweeen 1.4-16..
so basically in the lens name (eg. users Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D) .. the number f1.8 denotes the largest aperture possible... while the smallest aperture is not mentioned in the lens name...

[Digidave]

oh ok.. so the aperture varies betweeen 1.4-16..
so basically in the lens name (eg. users Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D) .. the number f1.8 denotes the largest aperture possible... while the smallest aperture is not mentioned in the lens name...

You got it!!:D Like I said, I'll be testing out my new lens this weekend. If it doesn't rain! I'll see what i can come up with for examples.

[jjohnsen]

2. Sigma 70-300mmf/4-5.6 Macro APO DG (under $200.00 US) Must be the APO version ( Mounts for Canon, Nikon, Pentax and Minolta cameras)

I tried to tell the difference between the APO version $220 at B&H and the non-APO version $130 and B&H. You say the APO is a must, can you explain why because all the specs look very similar to someone as untrained as I am.

[mattdm]

I tried to tell the difference between the APO version $220 at B&H and the non-APO version $130 and B&H. You say the APO is a must, can you explain why because all the specs look very similar to someone as untrained as I am.

See the wikipedia article here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apochromat) for an explanation of what the APO means. And yeah, from reviews I've seen (http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/230/cat/31), the APO version is probably worth it.

[Saralonde]

I tried to tell the difference between the APO version $220 at B&H and the non-APO version $130 and B&H. You say the APO is a must, can you explain why because all the specs look very similar to someone as untrained as I am.

The APO version has 2 extra SLD (special low dispersion) glass elements. I think this helps with chromatic aberration.

[inkista]

... with [50mm f/1.8] lens , you won't be able to take landscape shots due to the low aperture setting.. am i right ??
As Digidave explained, the rating is only its maximum possible aperture--you can stop it down to much smaller apertures to increase the DoF.

Where you might run into trouble with a 50mm and landscapes is that the field of view might not be wide enough (i.e., you'd want to zoom out). The 50mm is not a wide angle lens, especially on a crop body.

However, with digital photography, there's a way to "extend" the width of your lens: photostitching (http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/). You can take several overlapping images, and stitch them together to create a larger image. It's not exactly the same as having a wide-angle lens, but it can approximate one.

[jjohnsen]

Thanks mattdm and Saralonde.

[jjohnsen]

Sample Pictures using Sigma 70-300mm Macro APO DG. All sharpened and cropped in Picasa.
Macro sample. 1/100, 5.0, ISO 100, focal length 214mm:
http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w191/Saralonde_2007/IMG_4435.jpg
Firs of all I wanted to thank you for suggesting this lens. I found it on sale for $170, and am very happy with it. Quick question though, how did you take this photo? Even when I switch the lens and my camera to macro, it can't seem to focus on anything within 3-4 feet of my camera. Are you just a few feet away on a tripod, or am I doing something wrong. The lens hunts and hunts, but doesn't even come close to focusing on the object. :confused:

[Saralonde]

It does have a tendency to hunt a bit when focusing at close range or in low light. I was probably about 4 feet away when I took this.

[Clusty]

Does anybody know where you can still buy the Sigma 70-300mm APO for a Nikon?

[Saralonde]

Does anybody know where you can still buy the Sigma 70-300mm APO for a Nikon?

Are you in the US? Here it is at Canoga Camera (http://www.canogacamera.com/detail.aspx?ID=8904).

[smc1377]

Does anybody know where you can still buy the Sigma 70-300mm APO for a Nikon?

Or you can simply go to this page below on the Sigma website and enter in your local information to see if anyone local is selling the lens. That way you can at least put it on your camera and find out if you like it first before buying.

However, I tried finding anyone local to me (kansas city) and no one carried the lens in stock.

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/where/where.asp

[filemanager]

Does anybody know where you can still buy the Sigma 70-300mm APO for a Nikon?

Or here:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000A7V2DC/ref=reg_hu-wl_item-added

I want to get it - but my husband is making me wait until after my birthday (Sunday) and Christmas :(

[Sionara]

I received a Canon 75-300 mm f/4-5.6 III USM lens for my birthday this past weekend. I was just wondering what everyone thought of this lens. I am debating on taking it back and saving up for the IS version of the lens (at an increased cost of about $350 over the non-IS version). Is this a good idea or should I just stick with the one I have? I'm on a pretty tight budget right now, so it would be a little while before I could afford the IS model.

[Saralonde]

I'm going to direct you to some reviews.
For the Canon 75-300 mm f/4-5.6 III USM you have
fredmiranda (http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=18&sort=7&cat=27&page=3) and Digital Picture (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-75-300mm-f-4-5.6-III-USM-Lens-Review.aspx).
For the IS version: fredmiranda (http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=294&sort=7&cat=27&page=3) and digital picture (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx).

The is one is a better lens and might be worth saving up for. Will you be using this lens a great deal?
Other options in this price range would be the Canon 70-200mm f/4L (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-4.0-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx), an excellent lens, but it does not have as long a reach.

[inkista]

I received a Canon 75-300 mm f/4-5.6 III USM lens for my birthday this past weekend. I was just wondering what everyone thought of this lens. I am debating on taking it back and saving up for the IS version of the lens (at an increased cost of about $350 over the non-IS version). Is this a good idea or should I just stick with the one I have? I'm on a pretty tight budget right now, so it would be a little while before I could afford the IS model.
Depends on how desperately you want to shoot telephoto now. If you can wait, I'd say get the full price of the 75-300 III and save towards the 70-300 IS USM (NOT the old 75-300 III IS--that one's discontinued and nowhere near as well-designed optically); or the 70-200 f/4L USM. If you can't wait, then keep the lens and just take longer to save up for a better one. You can always get some of the value back by selling it used.

The thing is, the lens in your bag is always more useful than the one on the store shelf.

I have the non-USM, non-IS version of the 75-300 III, and it's kind of a dog. But it taught me how to shoot with a telephoto and the importance of the shutter speed <= 1/focal_length rule. Within its limits, it's good, but those limits are pretty stringent: <250mm, f/8, etc. I've pretty much replaced it with an EF 400mm f/5.6L USM, but I still keep the 75-300 III for those times when I really really have to have a small, light zoom. Like, if I'm at Disneyland. :)

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/inkista/520958980/" title="Mine? Mine! Mine? by inkista, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/211/520958980_b1d1eb3eb3.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="Mine? Mine! Mine?" /></a>

[Sionara]

I'm going to direct you to some reviews.
For the Canon 75-300 mm f/4-5.6 III USM you have
fredmiranda (http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=18&sort=7&cat=27&page=3) and Digital Picture (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-75-300mm-f-4-5.6-III-USM-Lens-Review.aspx).
For the IS version: fredmiranda (http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=294&sort=7&cat=27&page=3) and digital picture (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx).

The is one is a better lens and might be worth saving up for. Will you be using this lens a great deal?
Other options in this price range would be the Canon 70-200mm f/4L (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-4.0-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx), an excellent lens, but it does not have as long a reach.

After reading some of the reviews, I think I have decided to take the Canon lens back and see if I can get the Sigma 70-300 APO DG Macro. Thanks for the info. I was more impressed by some of the pics taken with this lens and the macro feature is nice.

[Sionara]

I called my local camera shop (where I purchased the lens I would like to return) and they told me that while they don't stock the Sigma 70-300 APO, they could order it for me for $249. Isn't that a little high? Where can I find the lens for less than $200 besides Amazon?

[Saralonde]

BHphoto (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/391074-REG/Sigma_508101_70_300mm_f_4_5_6_APO_DG.html) $219
Sigma4less (http://www.sigma4less.com/sess/utn;jsessionid=154760679cf0449/shopdata/0010_Lenses/0010_Zoom/0040_Tele+Zoom/product_details.shopscript?article=0350_Sigma%2BZo om%2BTelephoto%2B70-300mm%2Bf%3D26slash%3D3B4-5%3D252E6%2BAPO%2BDG%2BMacro%2BAutofocus%2BLens%2B for%2BCanon%2BEOS%2B%3D28SG70300F4ADCA%3D29) $175

Both are reputable dealers.

[Margie25]

Hi,

I really love the Sigma lens 70- 300 mm APO. I shot some awesome photos at the wedding from a family member about 2 weeks ago with this lens.

It works so great for portraits. My niece was so impressed with the head shot photo I took from her. :)

[filemanager]

Even when I switch the lens and my camera to macro, it can't seem to focus on anything within 3-4 feet of my camera.

Wait, what? You have to switch the lens & camera to macro mode?

My father-in-law has a very awesome, and very expensive macro lens, and when I tried it I didn't have to switch into any 'mode' :confused:

[mattdm]

Wait, what? You have to switch the lens & camera to macro mode?

My father-in-law has a very awesome, and very expensive macro lens, and when I tried it I didn't have to switch into any 'mode' :confused:

Some macro lenses, including apparently this one, have a focus limiter switch so you can minimize seeking when focusing -- if you know you're not going to be focusing up close, you can switch it into a mode which doesn't try. It's not really like macro mode in a compact camera, because no lens elements actually move.

The camera's macro mode just optimizes settings for macro photography -- evaluative metering, single-shot drive. No effect on focusing.

[ScooberJake]

The camera's macro mode just optimizes settings for macro photography -- evaluative metering, single-shot drive. No effect on focusing.

I've been wondering what that mode actually did. Thanks.

[mattdm]

I've been wondering what that mode actually did. Thanks.

I wish camera makers — it's everyone, not just Canon — would clearly explain in the manual precisely what each mode does. Mostly they give vague advice about when to use each mode ("use Snow Mode in the snow!") but don't explain the details anywhere.

[islandseas]

I'm glad I took the time to read this thread. I think I'm going to have to replace my Tamron 70-300 macro lens. I dropped my camera case a couple of weeks ago and the filter on it broke but everything else seemed fine until today....I was shooting and all of a sudden I couldn't move the lens from the 300mm down to the 70mm. I'm taking it in tomorrow but I think I'm going to have to replace it. The Sigma sounds like a good one to replace it with. Thanks for all the info everyone.

Karen

[anoneck]

Great photos. I invested in the Nikon 18-200 VR lenses with the idea of never having to change the lens, but after reading about the 50mm's on these forums, I think I need one in my bag.

[Wanman]

Well since this has been revived let me ask a question. Is there a budget wide angle lens that seems to be the best bet for the money. I find that I will need something less 20mm with the XTI. I am sure I would love the Sigma 10-20 but really don't want to toss out $400 for it. Would just like some insight, as I respect the opinions of this thread. After reading this thread I have bought both the 50mm 1.8 and the Sigma 70-300 APO. I can say these were excellent choices and I love the results I get from them.

[mattdm]

Well since this has been revived let me ask a question. Is there a budget wide angle lens that seems to be the best bet for the money. I find that I will need something less 20mm with the XTI. I am sure I would love the Sigma 10-20 but really don't want to toss out $400 for it. Would just like some insight, as I respect the opinions of this thread. After reading this thread I have bought both the 50mm 1.8 and the Sigma 70-300 APO. I can say these were excellent choices and I love the results I get from them.

It's hard to make a really wide-angle lens. At $400, the Sigma 10-20 is the budget option.

[wulf]

Look for something old and second-hand (having scoped round for some online reviews first). That's what I did for my two fast primes and I'm very happy with them (and, I think, less than $200 for both of them together).

Wulf

[kalath]

@Wanman: Check this out. http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-17-35mm-2-8-4-Aspherical-Cameras/dp/B0001E5UDM/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1207278989&sr=8-1 Yes, that price is right. I got mine today and I'm loving every second of it.

[mattdm]

@Wanman: Check this out. http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-17-35mm-2-8-4-Aspherical-Cameras/dp/B0001E5UDM/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1207278989&sr=8-1 Yes, that price is right. I got mine today and I'm loving every second of it.

Nothing wrong with that lens especially at that price, but it's not particularly wide angle on a 1.6× crop Canon DSLR. There's a huge difference between 17mm and 10mm — specifically, the difference between a 67° field of view and a 97° one.

[cmgar]

Well, I gotta say, I'm glad I read through the posts but a little worried now. I've been working with a Minolta DiMage 7 since they were released several years ago and finally decided to upgrade my gear. So I went out and preordered the Canon Rebel XSi and a Sigma Zoom lens kit to go along with it. I was super pumped about finally having a nice zoom lens, although I wish I'd read through this forum post first. Here's the kit I ordered, http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000HTPT14 it has the Sigma 70-300mm DG Macro lens, but after reading this, I went back and looked through the amazon page and can't find anything that says APO, so I'm assuming I didn't get that one. Now, I'm a little worried about the chromatic aboration (sp?). Does anyone have this lens sans the APO? I read all of the reviews on amazon but, there's only 9 or so of them. If anyone has it, could you tell me all the wonderful things it can do? ;) Or if I should send it back and trade up?

[superdewa]

I have a Nikon D40 that came with the 18-55 mm lens. It's pretty new, and I am still learning the ropes of an SLR. A lot of this lens talk is still way above me.

I feel like I ought to be satisfied with the lens I have until I've figured everything out -- especially since money is tight. What I really want to be able to do, however, is take photos of animals and birds, and this lens just isn't hacking it. I borrowed a 55-200 VR lens from a family member, and I loved that I could take decent photos of my in-laws' dogs without having to getting so close that they got up to lick me, LOL. I want that, and I want to be able to take my camera on hikes and get that woodpecker without it looking like a speck on a tree or flying away because I had to get so close. I also take a lot of photos of my children, so a lens that does nice portraits would be helpful too -- but I'm not as concerned about this, as I seem to be getting decent photos of them already.

Of the two lenses recommended for the Nikon in the first post, which makes more sense for shooting animals -- the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D or the Sigma 70-300mmf/4-5.6 Macro APO DG? Or is there a different lens you would recommend?

And can I assume correctly that both these lenses have autofocus with a d40?

Thanks in advance,
Deirdre

[Dr. WooD]

I have a Nikon D40 that came with the 18-55 mm lens. It's pretty new, and I am still learning the ropes of an SLR. A lot of this lens talk is still way above me.

I feel like I ought to be satisfied with the lens I have until I've figured everything out -- especially since money is tight. What I really want to be able to do, however, is take photos of animals and birds, and this lens just isn't hacking it. I borrowed a 55-200 VR lens from a family member, and I loved that I could take decent photos of my in-laws' dogs without having to getting so close that they got up to lick me, LOL. I want that, and I want to be able to take my camera on hikes and get that woodpecker without it looking like a speck on a tree or flying away because I had to get so close. I also take a lot of photos of my children, so a lens that does nice portraits would be helpful too -- but I'm not as concerned about this, as I seem to be getting decent photos of them already.

Of the two lenses recommended for the Nikon in the first post, which makes more sense for shooting animals -- the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D or the Sigma 70-300mmf/4-5.6 Macro APO DG? Or is there a different lens you would recommend?

And can I assume correctly that both these lenses have autofocus with a d40?

Thanks in advance,
Deirdre


Uhhhh NO! I knew the 50 woodn't AF, but had to look up the Sigma. It states it has no ultrasonic AF motor. As far as shooting animals, which I'm guessing wood be wildlife, the 50 wood be pretty much useless. I'd look around for a good used 300 f/4 prime. Unless you could afford my dream lens, the Nikon 400 f/2.8

[mattdm]

Sigma has a list of lenses that will autofocus on the D40:

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/news/news.asp?nID=3289

(Plus there's a few more that have come out since a year ago. Basically anything with HSM in the name should work, including the very interesting but not-out-yet 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM. Although I agree that's not the best for wildlife.)

[BulldogMom]

Hi all!

After reading through this thread and posting several questions else where I feel confident about two of the lenses that I plan to buy for my soon to be new baby, XTi. I plan to get the Sigma 70-300 APO and the Canon 50 f/1.8 II.

By the way -Saralonde and Sime, you have been such a great help! Thank you so much.

But I am also considering the Sigma 28-70 f/2.8-4 DG AF lens.

I'm thinking it will be an all around everyday type of lens for when I don't need the longer zoom. And I'm hoping that it will take a decent sport shot in a highschool gym when I want a zoom instead of just the 50mm.

I am on a tight budget (aren't we all these days) and I have asked questions and compaired this to other lenses in the same price/zoom range and think this is the one I want.

Just not 100% sure it will handle the sports very well. Does anyone have anythoughts on this?

[inkista]

Hmmm... well if there isn't an urgent need for it right away, maybe you can just hold off on buying the Sigma 28-70 until you've had a chance to shoot a game in the gym with the 50. Then, you can look at the EXIF from the photos and see if the available light would let you use the Sigma. Also, you'll get a better approximation of whether the focal lengths are going to work for you.

[superdewa]

Thanks! I appreciate the quick and honest answer! Unfortunately, on my budget, I'll probably have to settle for something a lot less than what I want.

Uhhhh NO! I knew the 50 woodn't AF, but had to look up the Sigma. It states it has no ultrasonic AF motor. As far as shooting animals, which I'm guessing wood be wildlife, the 50 wood be pretty much useless. I'd look around for a good used 300 f/4 prime. Unless you could afford my dream lens, the Nikon 400 f/2.8

[superdewa]

This is a helpful site. I appreciate the input.

Sigma has a list of lenses that will autofocus on the D40:

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/news/news.asp?nID=3289

(Plus there's a few more that have come out since a year ago. Basically anything with HSM in the name should work, including the very interesting but not-out-yet 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM. Although I agree that's not the best for wildlife.)

[Atlas88]

@BulldogMom: You might also want to consider the new Canon-EF-S 55-250mm f-4-5.6 IS (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-55-250mm-f-4-5.6-IS-Lens-Review.aspx) lens and compare it with the Sigma 70-300 APO. They are of similar price, but the Canon has IS which at this price range makes it a bargain. Although I don't yet have this lens, I plan on picking one up in the next couple of months. So far, the reviews are favourable.

After talking with a co-worker last week about lenses, he brought in his Canon 75-300 lens so I could get an idea of what kind of focal range I could expect. I zoomed up on things around the office and without IS, it made getting a clear shot very difficult. Camera shake at 300mm was very hard to control. Still, if you're shooting outdoors where there's generally considerable more light, this may not be as big an issue as you'll be able to use higher shutter speeds. That experience has piqued my interest in the 55-250 IS. Just my 2 cents.

[Amir.S.]

Saralonde,

thank you so much for convincing me to purchase the Sigma APO DG 70-300mm.

I think I will get one in the next 2 weeks at most.

[Saralonde]

Saralonde,

thank you so much for convincing me to purchase the Sigma APO DG 70-300mm.

I think I will get one in the next 2 weeks at most.

Hope you like it!

[Amir.S.]

Hey I finally got the lens.

As soon as I make some pics with it I will share.

[Saralonde]

We'd love to see them! Hope you are enjoying it!

[Matthew James Norman]

Anyone have any views on the Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Canon fit lens? I believe that's a budget lens available in the UK for under £200.00.

[Amir.S.]

Here are my first two shots that I uploaded to Flickr with Sigma 70-300 APO DG

http://www.flickr.com/photos/amiripz/2539776366/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/amiripz/2541439037/

[Agata]

Your thread has inspired me to buy a 50mm 1.8 lens. I LOVE IT TO BITS! Many thanks!

[Saralonde]

Your thread has inspired me to buy a 50mm 1.8 lens. I LOVE IT TO BITS! Many thanks!

So glad you like it!

[chrismar]

Got the Sigma 70-300mm a few weeks ago. Finally had a chance to put it to use for a few moon shots. Here's the best one:

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrismar/2571175931/" title="June Moon by chrismar, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2088/2571175931_87f012f158.jpg" width="500" height="368" alt="June Moon" /></a>

[ajshroff]

Great post. Thanks a lot. I have just bought a new xTi and this post will definitely help me graduate from the kits lens :)
Aj

[corry]

@Wanman: Check this out. http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-17-35mm-2-8-4-Aspherical-Cameras/dp/B0001E5UDM/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1207278989&sr=8-1 Yes, that price is right. I got mine today and I'm loving every second of it.so this will work on the rebel xti? i thought they changed the mount so you can't use older lenses, they have to be the Ef or EFS kind? i really don't know too much but i understood you couldn't mount older lenses on these newer models of canon?* i've peeked around at used lenses but didn't think i could use any with my xti.

[chrismar]

so this will work on the rebel xti? i thought they changed the mount so you can't use older lenses, they have to be the Ef or EFS kind? i really don't know too much but i understood you couldn't mount older lenses on these newer models of canon?* i've peeked around at used lenses but didn't think i could use any with my xti.
According to the reviews it will... YMMV. (Your Mileage May Vary)

[cmgar]

Hey Chrismar,

Great moon shot, I've been meaning to take one of the half moon. Here's one I snapped with the same lens, minus the "APO".

Exif:
Make: Canon
Model: Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XSi
Shutter Speed: 1/256 second
F Number: F/5.6
Focal Length: 300 mm
ISO Speed: 100
Date Picture Taken: Apr 18, 2008, 10:11:04 AM

[chrismar]

Hey Chrismar,

Great moon shot, I've been meaning to take one of the half moon. Here's one I snapped with the same lens, minus the "APO".

Exif:
Make: Canon
Model: Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XSi
Shutter Speed: 1/256 second
F Number: F/5.6
Focal Length: 300 mm
ISO Speed: 100
Date Picture Taken: Apr 18, 2008, 10:11:04 AM
Thanks! And yours is nice too!

Hopefully I'll be able to get out there in a day or 2 when it's full to snap one.

[filemanager]

2. Sigma 70-300mmf/4-5.6 Macro APO DG (under $200.00 US) Must be the APO version ( Mounts for Canon, Nikon, Pentax and Minolta cameras)
Rating: 8/10
Pros: inexpensive, comes with a lens hood, can function as a macro (1:2), versatility
Cons: needs good light (can hunt for focus), soft above 200mm
If you want an inexpensive zoom lens, look no farther then this. It can be used for portraits, outdoor sports, and nature/macro photography. This lens is nice for trying out macro, even though it is not true macro which is 1:1, not the 1:2 this lens has. It can manage some outdoor sports, but if this is something you shoot a lot, a faster lens might be better.

Does anyone know how this compares to the Nikkor 70-300mm?

I'm trying to figure out if the Nikkor is worth the $500, as opposed to the $170 Sigma!

[mattdm]

Does anyone know how this compares to the Nikkor 70-300mm?

I'm trying to figure out if the Nikkor is worth the $500, as opposed to the $170 Sigma!

This depends on what you mean by "worth". Since you're saying $500, I presume you mean the newer 70-300 with vibration reduction and an ultrasonic focus motor. For your money, you get those features and a better build and better technical image quality. For the price, though, you could pick up two budget lenses, so....

[filemanager]

What I mean by "worth" is, by paying the extra money, would the image quality be a lot better, or between the two lenses, is the image quality just about the same?

[mattdm]

What I mean by "worth" is, by paying the extra money, would the image quality be a lot better, or between the two lenses, is the image quality just about the same?

Well, most people won't be able to tell the difference in final images in almost all cases. But again, "just about the same" is really quite subjective.

[filemanager]

Well I just got back from the camera store, and I ended up buying the Nikon lens. SWEET!

Now... one issue..... I have the Lowepro Slingshot 100.. and the big lens won't fit in my bag. LOL

[jamesandype]

Hi

I'm still very new to the board and I found a few similar thread as this one, but will post here.

I have been reading up on the different lenses that are available and all sound very tempting.

Currently owning a Canon 400D, would members who own a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Lens (just read its nicknamed "nifty fifty" ...) highly recommend this? Some reviews on here and other places have a fifty/fifty like and hate review of this lens. Is it really worth it?

Also, do shops sell this lens in all camera distributors? I am going on holiday with my family later year and was hoping to buy this lens on our trip to the USA and Canada. Places recommended?

much appreciated:)

[mattdm]

Currently owning a Canon 400D, would members who own a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Lens (just read its nicknamed "nifty fifty" ...) highly recommend this? Some reviews on here and other places have a fifty/fifty like and hate review of this lens. Is it really worth it?


The only reason to not have this lens is if you have the 50mm f/1.4 instead. For its $90 price tag, it's absolutely worth it.

[inkista]

Currently owning a Canon 400D, would members who own a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Lens (just read its nicknamed "nifty fifty" ...) highly recommend this? Some reviews on here and other places have a fifty/fifty like and hate review of this lens. Is it really worth it?
For beginners on a budget, absolutely worth it. For oldtimers who can afford better glass, it depends. The thrifty fifty's image quality, and maximum aperture whomp the hell out of the kit lens, for about the same price, so it's a typical no-brainer recommendation for every newbie.

You simply have to know what you're getting and whether some qualities matter to you or not. The digital-picture review of the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-50mm-f-1.4-USM-Lens-Review.aspx) gives a very good comparison of Canon's 50mm f/1.8 ($90), f/1.4 ($300), and f/1.2 ($1400) lenses.

The thing about the f/1.8 is that it's inexpensive--so inexpensive that its shortcomings are well within the "worth it" margin, and if you do end up upgrading later, the f/1.8 can remain your "trashable" travel lens, or good for poor man's macro photography with reversal rings and extension tubes.

[filemanager]

Currently owning a Canon 400D, would members who own a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Lens (just read its nicknamed "nifty fifty" ...) highly recommend this? Some reviews on here and other places have a fifty/fifty like and hate review of this lens. Is it really worth it?

Also, do shops sell this lens in all camera distributors? I am going on holiday with my family later year and was hoping to buy this lens on our trip to the USA and Canada. Places recommended?

much appreciated:)

That lens is DEFINITELY worth it. Don't even think, just GET IT. For the price you can't go wrong!!!

I live in Canada, and the big camera store chain up here is Henry's. I was just there today, actually :)

[jamesandype]

Wow, thanks for the quick responses! much appreciated.

Ok I've decided - I'm going to get it on my holiday.

[superdewa]

This thread is awesome. So nice not to have to make apologies for not having the money to spend on expensive lenses. You've pretty much convinced me to buy the Sigma 70-300mm APO DG autofocus lens for the my Nikon D40. Now I've got another question...

I am still very intrigued by the Nikkor 50mm 1.8 lens, which doesn't autofocus with my d40. Can anyone give me an idea of what is involved in manually focusing a lens on a digital camera? How much trouble is it? Is it worthwhile? Any links you can recommend on this?

I am a digital girl all the way -- I have never used a non-digital SLR -- barely even used non-digital point & shoots -- so comparing manually focusing this lens to manual focus on a non-digital won't help me much, sorry!

Deirdre

[filemanager]

It's not hard to manual-focus a lens. Sometimes I turn the AF off to manual focus in case the AF keeps focusing on the wrong thing, or whatever. Really you just turn the ring around the lens until it focuses where you want.

I'm really not good at explaining things :P

I would say, even though you'd have to manual focus, still get it, cause it's a SUPER awesome, and very sharp, lens!

[inkista]

Can anyone give me an idea of what is involved in manually focusing a lens on a digital camera? How much trouble is it? Is it worthwhile? Any links you can recommend on this?
No worries, as filemanager says, it's not hard. If you consider that autofocus only became a camera feature in the 1980s, that means that for the preceding century or so all photos were taken with manual focus.

Basically, there's a focus ring on the lens, just like there's a zoom ring. You look through the viewfinder, and turn the ring until the image is in focus, then you take the shot. The only real difficulties are if focus is critical and it becomes difficult for you to judge whether you've gotten the part of the photo in sharp focus that you want (shooting wide open in low light, etc.). But just as you can bracket for exposure, you can also bracket for focus.

You can also use your camera's autofocus system, even if it can't actually focus the lens. AF-confirmation can tell you when the AF system thinks something's in focus. Just half press the shutter button while you turn the focus ring. On my Canon XT, the AF point lights up. Not sure what happens with the Nikons, but a D300-shooting buddy of mine has said he's used that feature in all his Nikon bodies since film days.

And if you really get into using manual-focus lenses, you can also consider getting a split-circle focus screen for your camera.

[superdewa]

Thank you for the quick and helpful answers!

Now here's another related question. If I can't use the autofocus anyway on my d40, does it make sense to spend over $100 on this lens, when I can get older, Nikon 50mm lenses without autofocus for less (I just checked e-bay, and there were several).

If this idea makes sense, any thoughts on what I should look for and where I can find more information.

Sorry if my questions sound stupid. I'm really new to this.

[inkista]

Depends on how old the 50mm lens is, and whether or not you can still meter with it. For example, a pre-AI Nikkor lens, while you can use it and it will mount, won't meter on a D40. In addition, lens technology marches on. Older lenses typically aren't as good as newer ones (although there can be exceptions): aspherical elements, coatings, etc. can make a difference. While an older 50 1.8 might be just as sharp, it may be more susceptible to flare or have worse chromatic aberration. So, yeah, there's an upside to getting a newer lens vs. an older one. Also, if you end up upgrading your body in the future to say, the D80 (or its successors), then the lens will autofocus.

You basically have to do the research and decide what it's worth to you, savings-wise.

[Mr.Intensity]

Thanx Ladies and Gents':
I really needed to hear this thread. I just bought a $30. tripod and now I know I did ahh...ok; It's by; "Digital Design", 57" tall and It collapses to 22.2" It has "the Hook" at the center pole, and rubber feet. Levels also.has

And I'll buy, and own only, one lens tonight;
the ef-'S'18-55mm IS. I figure I can do everything ,practical, with it PLUS the "IS" feature should be real handy- a steady hand can get the best of a cheap lens, I'm told and convinced.

Everything from my 28-90mm fits ;)
When I screw on my 2x telephoto extension-which has the same filter diameter (my lens hood and macro ring will also fit) I should be better off there too$$.

And it won't be long before I sell these gadgets and the 28-90mm lens and can afford a 70-300mm Sigma or Tamron zoom. I do have another babies' party to do too, (their not critical at all!) a good place to get started making money and getting experience:)

[vandergus]

I can't believe there's over 100 posts in the budget lens thread with no mention of Nikon's Ai/Ais lenses or Pentax's K, M, and A lenses. Well lately I've been doing some research on the older lenses so I'll include some links here for the truly thrifty. Most of these lenses will be limited in some form such as autofocusing of metering modes, so if you're not willing to get your hands dirty in manual mode, this may not be for you. You do not, however, have to sacrifice image quality as many of these lenses will out perform your modern consumer level zoom.

Nikon:
I own a Nikon D40 so I've done a little more research in this area. Just so I don't have to repeat too much, here's a quick list of all of the different lenses that Nikon has produced over the years and how they will function on your camera.

Nikon lens compatibility. (http://www.bythom.com/lensacronyms.htm)

There are also lots of older third party lenses available that perform very well, although you have to be a little more careful in picking what you buy. When you buy Nikon, you can be pretty confident that you're getting a solid lens. With the others, a little more research is necessary. Vivitar, Sigma and Tokina all produced some good lenses from this time period. A good place to search for info on these types of lenses is the No Metering Lenses (http://www.flickr.com/groups/365610@N21/) group on Flickr. Hint: use the search feature.

Pentax: I don't own any Pentax gear but I've done a little reading so here's what I know. Pentax probably has the best compatibility with older lenses of any of the major manufacturers. Here's another table describing the ins and outs of compatibility.

Pentax lens compatibility. (http://www.mosphotos.com/PentaxLensCompatibility.html)

Ditto for third party lenses. Most of them made their designs in the Pentax mount as well.

So where do you buy such lenses. Well ebay is always popular. Don't be afraid to ask the seller questions if the description of the item is not clear. Also, broaden your searches a little bit to catch items that may be mislabeled or under labeled. I just picked up an old third party lens super cheap because it wasn't labeled as a Nikon mount. If you don't feel comfortable on ebay, keh.com (http://www.keh.com/onlinestore/home.aspx) has a large selection of used lenses at good prices. And one more fun place to look is shopgoodwill.com (http://www.shopgoodwill.com/), Goodwill's auction site. You really have to know what you're looking for, though, as there's often very little description of the items.

So there's some info to get you started in your hunt for some quality old-time glass.

[inkista]

Ken Rockwell also has a lens compatibility chart (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/compatibility-lens.htm#dslr) for Nikons that's pretty good.

The news is actually even better if you're shooting Canon, when it comes to manual focus lenses. Although using Canon's own FD lenses are out, you can mount a lot of other brands: Nikon F-mount (pre-AI, so not a problem), Pentax K, M42, Contax/Yashica (Zeiss), Olympus OM, and Leica R with simple adapter rings. And you retain stop-down metering, and (if you find a correctly chipped ring) AF confirmation. I've posted about using MF lenses in this thread (http://digital-photography-school.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22749), but didn't think to post here, since I've been paying more than $200 for the lenses I wanted. :)

But I mean, hey, if you can't afford a $90 EF 50mm f/1.8 II, then maybe it's time to pick up a $20 Olympus OM-mount Zuiko 50mm f/1.8 (although most of the mf lens guys tend to boast about finding them for $10 in a garage sale).

This chart (http://forum.mflenses.com/mount-compatibilities-t8158,start,30.html#68348) shows the compatibility between old mounts and new. Basically Canon can mount a lot of old lenses; 4/3 can mount a whole lot more (and possibly keep in-body stabilization with the correctly chipped adapter ring). The key is doing research and learning the brand nomenclatures and gotchas. (hard to focus without a split-circle focus screen, only usable in full manual and aperture-priority modes, metering issues, lost EXIF information, etc.)

http://slrlensreview.com/ has a number of reviews of manual focus lenses on Canon EOS digital bodies. And the Flickr group to look for would be EOS Cameras and Manual Lenses (http://www.flickr.com/groups/eos-manual-lenses/).

I'd also recommend spelunking around through the MF Lenses forums (http://www.mflenses.com/forum/).

[k9mom]

I am standing on the plank's edge, about to jump! Will buy the Canon 40D but am still tossing options of what lenses to buy. The standard kit includes the 28-135mm IS USM but I've read that with the 1.6x crop factor that this is a rather narrow lens and that the new EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS (http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EF-S-18-55mm-3-5-5-6-Lens/dp/B000V5K3FG) (at $150) would be a better general purpose lens. Has anyone here used this lens and, if so, what are your thoughts regarding this new EF-S 18-55mm IS versus the 29-135mm IS USM lens?

Alternative to the kit with the 28-135mm lens, for a little more $$ Adorama offers a 40D kit with an EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens. Would this be a better lens for general purpose use than the 28-135mm lens?

Okay, now here's the stupid question. I'm a bit confused about the difference between crop bodies and full-frame bodies and how this relates to lens selection and affects angle of view. (Here's an excerpt from a C|NET review of the 40D that I need someone to "translate", i.e., put it into lay terms for a newbie like myself: Taking into account the camera's 1.6x focal-length multiplier yields an angle of view equivalent to that of a 44.8mm-to-216mm lens on a 35mm camera.)

Thanks for any and all help. :confused:

Edited to add:

HA HA HA...
I just clicked over to the blog and VOILA! my crop vs. full-frame questions were all answered!
Talk about timing!!

[Spike]

I'm already looking at my next lens though I just got my Canon XSi last Tuesday.

First, I am indeed on a pretty tight budget, so the L's are pretty much out of the question unless I win a Lotto.

The Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III is looking really sweet (and is the most likely to be in my near-future at this juncture), but I am seeing so much positive buzz about the Sigma 70-300mm APO DG that I am wondering if I should wait (or make the necessary sacrifices) until I can afford the Sigma.

I am very pleased with my kit lens, whiich has IS. I know the above-mentioned Canon 70-300 does not have IS, which according to some reviews is a serious drawback when photographing sports action or in low light.

BUT on the other hand, most of the shooting I would be using the 300 of focal length for would be well-lit outdoor situations or in situations where I can use the tripod.

AND, the cheaper lens would save me enough for the 50mm prime and then some.

So, final question is, do the pictures themselves really show that much difference, or is it all about freedom from the tripod?

[inkista]

There's a non-APO version of the Sigma 70-300 that's closer to the 75-300 III in price. You may also want to look at sample images to see if you can see the difference between the two lenses, and whether it's worth paying more. None of these lenses are stabilized. (For Sigma, the equivalent of Canon IS is called "OS").

Not having stabilization limits telephoto shooting to shutter speeds that are at 1/focal_length or faster, so shooting at 300mm means you have to have a shutter speed of 1/300s or faster. And you'll (probably) be limited to f/5.6. So, even on sunny days, you're likely to be using iso settings of 400 or higher.

[Mr.Intensity]

I'm already looking at my next lens though I just got my Canon XSi last Tuesday.

First, I am indeed on a pretty tight budget, so the L's are pretty much out of the question unless I win a Lotto.

The Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III is looking really sweet (and is the most likely to be in my near-future at this juncture), but I am seeing so much positive buzz about the Sigma 70-300mm APO DG that I am wondering if I should wait (or make the necessary sacrifices) until I can afford the Sigma.

I am very pleased with my kit lens, whiich has IS. I know the above-mentioned Canon 70-300 does not have IS, which according to some reviews is a serious drawback when photographing sports action or in low light.

BUT on the other hand, most of the shooting I would be using the 300 of focal length for would be well-lit outdoor situations or in situations where I can use the tripod.

AND, the cheaper lens would save me enough for the 50mm prime and then some.

So, final question is, do the pictures themselves really show that much difference, or is it all about freedom from the tripod?I just got the canon 55-250mm IS, I had to get rid of the sigma 70-300 DG. I do a lot of street scenes and pans and I need that IS, plus summer is gone and I don't do that much 'bird watching' anymore.
The quality -with the IS-is surely better- however, I never used a tripod with the 70-300 (which, btw, I love the finish on that lens body, a quality touch with the flat black like powder coating, but that's neither here nor there:)
The budget end: The 55-250 cost me $320 total, and since I had to sell everything else to get it, I wanted a telephoto lens that I could get a little closer with (but cheaply) and still shoot at a bit of a distance.-with the help of the IS!

I got a post in sys-shot with my 55-250 IS- entitled 'SOC;bike'. from yesterday...or two days back now. I notice this a lot; With the IS shots; Nothing happens when I run the 'unsharpen mask' in post!so regardless of what I think I'm seeing wrong- it's not the blur.

[Mr.Intensity]

An overall note for what it's worth: I'm not a patient man, and I know; "Too much "Wait" broke the bridge" but; when I bought cheap cheap lenses in a hurry, the big stab in the heart was when I still wasn't nearly satisfied and it always happened that in a weeks time I had an opportunity at a few dollars more and regretted the buy? Plus, now I started to pay more attention to the negative pro reviews and NOW the piece where they say: "I just wouldn't even bother with them" is suddenly LOOMING!-lol Now it's back to ebay, listing and shipping, insertion fees and paypal fees, arg!. Here's something that might ease the stress tho: *I bought two remote shutter releases; one cabled and one wireless. that way you get the best from the lens you got- while you practice and build on everything else.

I'm somewhat satisfide with my 55-250 IS but before I think about a 500mm, I'll research a good doubler - I want moon shots now:)

[yalborap]

Are there any options for a poor Nikon shooter who only has 40 bucks to his name? I need a 50mm prime for the extra speed, but I'm working on...Not even a shoestring budget. I'm working on an aglet budget.

Or should I look towards something entirely different to start? All I have right now is what came in my D40's box, and a cheapo tripod I don't trust at all.

[wulf]

Are there any options for a poor Nikon shooter who only has 40 bucks to his name? I need a 50mm prime for the extra speed, but I'm working on...Not even a shoestring budget. I'm working on an aglet budget.
Old, second-hand and probably completely manual (even setting the aperture by twisting a ring).... you should be able to pick up something like that with your 40 bucks although don't neglect minor details like food and shelter! ;)

I've found old lenses to be an inexpensive way to build up a good glass collection (see my signature below).

Wulf

[loppen]

Hey I have a

Tamron AF 55-200mm 4-5.6 Di II Macro, Canon

An inexpensive zoom if any... And i'm thrilled.
Picked up a Canon xti last summer so I'm new to the game and don't know the proper lingo but my pictures just turn out sharper than with the 18-55 kit lens.:)

[wwlim]

how much did u get the 50mm 1.8 for? can u believe that it is so popular that there's currently no stock in malaysia?

[morts]

Just got a Sigma 70-300 APO lens for ~£135. *quite* happy about that!
Given that the standard high street price is ~£180...

Now to see what this baby can do! Going go-karting tomorrow so hopefully there will be lots of action shots!!

[ToPpS]

Yup.. i actually just checked with one of the places.. he said the HSM ones are AF with the nikon D40... there was a 55-200mm HSM (http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3326&navigator=6)lens available.. I was actually looking for a 18-200 mm lens..

there are only 2 HSM lens available... 18-50mm and the above one.. but the prices where really good.. at least when compared to the nikkor ones..

I have't tried any sigma lens.. so I'm assuming they are good ones.. any comments ??
Hey dalebo5.

I haven't had too much experience with Sigma/Tamron/etc. lenses. However i do own the Sigma 10-20mm 4-5.6 (Nikon) (Same as MatthewChj). It's a great wide angle lens and so far it has performed flawlessly. For most of my decision making, i rely on online reviews (http://www.slrgear.com) have an extensive list of photography reviews, well worth a quick peek.

[Motor559]

I have a Nikon D80 with two lenses (Tamron 28-300 1:3.5-6.3 macro and a Nikkor 50 mm 1.8D). I take a lot of pictures of wrestling (my son). Is there a better lense than I have to take these action shots without getting a lot of blur and without using the flash? I sit right next to the mat and it is hit or miss. I am very much a novice even though I have taken over 10000 pictures.

[Digidave]

I have a Nikon D80 with two lenses (Tamron 28-300 1:3.5-6.3 macro and a Nikkor 50 mm 1.8D). I take a lot of pictures of wrestling (my son). Is there a better lense than I have to take these action shots without getting a lot of blur and without using the flash? I sit right next to the mat and it is hit or miss. I am very much a novice even though I have taken over 10000 pictures.

With those 2 lenses, your best bet is the 50mm. Try to get as close as you can & don't go above f/2.8 for your aperture. You may be able to crop it down to your liking in PP. If you want to use a long & fast zoom lens, you'll wind up spending a whole lot of money on it! Quality & speed comes at a price, unfortunately.

[Jilldai]

I am considering buying one of these lenses. Can anyone please post some more images taken with these lenses? Your help greatly appreciated!!

Thanks!

[Saralonde]

I am considering buying one of these lenses. Can anyone please post some more images taken with these lenses? Your help greatly appreciated!!

Thanks!

Check out the 50mm prime challenge (http://digital-photography-school.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13631).

[krossk]

I just happened to stumble across a used Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 in my local camera shop in excelent condition for $60. That was just too good to pass up!:D

[Mr.Intensity]

No images but just a great experience. I did a party for a 30 yo woman sat. and I was forever trying coax the dj to turn up the lights a little:)
out of 319 shots I'm selling more than half BUT! If I had kept the 50mm-that I hated, and sold months ago- I could've done great things with the; low light and the many shiny dresses and heels and lighted decorations!
I just bought a gadget light box/diffuser that you attach to the on board flash too...and left it home:(
Had a ball- I could write a blog on the psychology of shooting 60 pretty women-very easy:)