Lens conundrum...

[Trav-man]

I currently have the Rebel XT with the 18-55 kits lens. I like shooting landscapes and architecture, which is very difficult to shoot. Shots are indoors and outdoors and it requires a wide end lens and a close-up of details (sometimes one shot right after the other). Now that you know my position, my post has 2 questions in within it:

1. Do you think it would be easier to shoot with both the 18-55 kits lens and a 70-300 macro lens (either the Sigma or the Tamron) or with one lens (18-200 and again the Sigma or the Tamron) I don't know how much of a hassle it is changing lenses when shooting and I am a very novice photographer and only have ~$300 to spend.

2. Out of each one of these lens groups, with lens is the best for the money?

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC vs. Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di II Macro vs. Tamron 28-300mm f3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical Macro

Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG APO Macro vs. Tamron AF70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro

I have also read somewhere that the Canon Rebel can't use its AF at the 6.3 end, is this true?

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks to Saralonde for her help to this point and informing me enough so I don't sound extremely inexperienced.

[smc1377]

Me, I would go with the Sigma 18-200 or the Tamron 18-200. I haven't read anything about either of those lenses to make a suggestion. But I wouldn't go with the 28-300 simply because 28 really isn't wide enough for architectural photography and also you really don't need anything more than 200 really unless you're trying to capture wildlife, IMO.

[RexK_Cozumel]

Originally Posted by Trav-man

1. Do you think it would be easier to shoot with both the 18-55 kits lens and a 70-300 macro lens (either the Sigma or the Tamron) or with one lens (18-200 and again the Sigma or the Tamron) I don't know how much of a hassle it is changing lenses when shooting and I am a very novice photographer and only have ~$300 to spend.

Of course it will be "easier" if you had a single lens that covers the whole range but remember that with a big zoom range like that you will get some distortion in your photos. Tamron also makes a 18-250 but it is a little out of your price range about $500. I have the lens and it is great I have it on almost all the time only need to change for macro work or low light.

Originally Posted by Trav-man

2. Out of each one of these lens groups, with lens is the best for the money?

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC vs. Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di II Macro vs. Tamron 28-300mm f3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical Macro

Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG APO Macro vs. Tamron AF70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro

I have never owned a sigma but I have the tamron 18-250 which is the upgrade to the 18-200 and the lens is very nice. gives you nice wide angle for those landscapes but since you are not shooting wildlife you will probabbly not need the long end of the range. I also once owned the tamron 28-300 and I can not recommend that lens. it is just not very well built. the lens kept extending when I pointed the camera down and the lens is kinda heavy. Also do you really need a 300mm lens?? again if you are shooting landscape and architecture I would think that you would be better off spending your money on something in the range of 18-85 or so.

Originally Posted by Trav-man

I have also read somewhere that the Canon Rebel can't use its AF at the 6.3 end, is this true?

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks to Saralonde for her help to this point and informing me enough so I don't sound extremely inexperienced.

While I do not own a cannon I would think that if the AF works for the lens it would not matter what the aperature is set to. I think that (someone correct me if I am wrong) the reason that AF does not work is that some cameras do not have a motor in the body so it will only autofocus if the lens has a motor. but I have never heard of a lens that will focus with one setting but not another. Again I could be wrong.... I am new to all this as well.

I hope this helps..

[matthewchj]

Originally Posted by RexK_Cozumel

While I do not own a cannon I would think that if the AF works for the lens it would not matter what the aperature is set to. I think that (someone correct me if I am wrong) the reason that AF does not work is that some cameras do not have a motor in the body so it will only autofocus if the lens has a motor. but I have never heard of a lens that will focus with one setting but not another.

Canon consumer and prosumer DSLRs require a lens that can open up to at least f/5.6 in order for AF to work. This is not due to the lens motor; all Canon lenses have motors built into them, but due to the sensitivity of the AF sensor which is built into the body.

This does not mean that you can't take a picture using AF at an aperture of say f/11. The lens just needs to be opened up to at least f/5.6, not set to f/5.6, as AF takes place when the lens is wide open.

Canon Professional cameras (1- series bodies) have a more sensitive AF sensor, and can AF with lenses f/8 or faster.

[Trav-man]

I am new to "professional" photography, but my understanding of what you said is that the 3.5-6.3 lens will still focus at the far end, but it has to open to f5.6 then back to f6.3? I guess I am lost.

Thanks for the advice on the lenses, I do like to shoot a little bit of wildlife, and really like the chance to try macrio photography with the 70-300, but if the 18-200 provides the best option as a walk-around lens, and the difference between 200 and 300 isnt that great, then I am still even more confused as what to do. Does anyone else have an opinion about the lenses I previously mentioned?

Thanks.

[matthewchj]

Originally Posted by Trav-man

I am new to "professional" photography, but my understanding of what you said is that the 3.5-6.3 lens will still focus at the far end, but it has to open to f5.6 then back to f6.3? I guess I am lost.

Guess I should have been a little more clear...

The lens cannot AF at all at the far end as the aperture cannot open up to f/5.6, but only to f/6.3.

What happens is that when you take a picture with say an f/2.8 lens with the aperture set to f/11 through the camera, the camera AFs with the lens at f/2.8. When you take the picture, it stops down to f/11, then once the shutter closes the aperture reopens to f/2.8.

[smc1377]

From the canon knowledge database:

Issue: Autofocus does not work
Solution: The camera is unable to auto focus when the maximum working aperture falls below f/5.6.

In order to maintain autofocus capabilities, the lens must maintain at maximum working aperture of at least f/5.6 or greater.

If a 1.4x EF Extender is used on a lens that has a maximum working aperture of f/4 or greater, the camera will continue to be able to autofocus. If the same extender is used on a lens with a maximum aperture smaller than f/4, the maximum working aperture will be smaller than f/5.6, so auto focus will not be possible.

If a 2x EF Extender is used on a lens that has a maximum working aperture of f/2.8 or greater, the camera will continue to be able to autofocus. If the same extender is used on a lens with a maximum aperture smaller than f/2.8, the maximum working aperture will be smaller than f/5.6, so auto focus will not be possible.

[Trav-man]

With these comments, I would assume that with the 18-200 lens, you would have to manually focus the lens at the far end @ f/6.3, correct? If this is the case, does anyone feel this would be annoying or a hassle?

With that in mind, and getting back to my original question, would anyone have a suggestion for the 18-200 range or similar that is in the $300 price range. It is looking like I have to comprimise a lot of things for the cheap price.

[matthewchj]

Canon has a 28-200 lens that opens up to f/5.6 at the long end, but isn't as wide (28mm compared to 18mm)

Here's a review:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

[pdurk]

I do not use Cannon nor have I used any of the lenses you mention. But it seems to me when reading your requirements and your possible list of solutions, that you more or less have the answer to your question in your posting.
If landscape and architecture are your main interests, then you can rule out all the lenses starting at 28mm and above. Wider is better and you probably will rarely use the 300mm length anyway.
If you want to photograph close up detail as well then the 18-200mm lens with macro would seem to be the obvious choice. Again I have no idea about the performance of this lens. I have the Nikon 18-200 VR lens which is great for convenience as I can cover most shots with just the one lens, but, whilst the quality is good it is not as sharp or fast as a fixed focus lens (obviously). And I don't have that macro facility either which you want.
Hope that helps and happy shooting!