A limit to lens upgrade?
Apr 3, 2014 09:43:08 #
Having a Rebel t3i and knowing there are better lenses than the kit lens I chose (18-135mm 3.5-5.6F IS), I wonder how far up the line I should even consider going for improvement. I care about the distance for both wildlife and dancers, as well as low f for nature/arty endeavors. Any thoughts?
Apr 3, 2014 09:50:22 #
Always remember that its the LENS that captures the image. A camera is nothing more than a recording device for the lens.
Apr 3, 2014 10:00:19 #
MT Shooter wrote:
Always remember that its the LENS that captures the image. A camera is nothing more than a recording device for the lens.
Agreed. And I haven't taken advantage of (not learned yet) its (the camera's) capacity yet, so I am not in any rush. Are you saying that I could legitimately put a white lens on a rebel body? Like a million dollar upgrade on 200K house? (possible but not wise for return value?)
Apr 3, 2014 10:09:32 #
dancing2flower wrote:
Agreed. And I haven't taken advantage of (not learned yet) its (the camera's) capacity yet, so I am not in any rush. Are you saying that I could legitimately put a white lens on a rebel body? Like a million dollar upgrade on 200K house? (possible but not wise for return value?)
You could easily put a white lens on the rebel and improve your image quality over the kit lenses. As well as have the lens already should you ever consider moving up to a full frame body. Canon does not build "L" lenses in EFS mount, only EF mounts, but they will all work just fine for you.
Apr 3, 2014 10:13:14 #
MT Shooter wrote:
Always remember that its the LENS that captures the image. A camera is nothing more than a recording device for the lens.
MT Shooter if you are interested go to Watched Topics(146) at the top of the page and look at Test Tamron 150-600 and Canon 7D. You will see a photo of Jance there that went on one of your last trips....Rich
Apr 3, 2014 10:21:02 #
amehta
Loc: Boston
dancing2flower wrote:
Agreed. And I haven't taken advantage of (not learned yet) its (the camera's) capacity yet, so I am not in any rush. Are you saying that I could legitimately put a white lens on a rebel body? Like a million dollar upgrade on 200K house? (possible but not wise for return value?)
I think the most efficient results are when the photographer, camera, and lens are of comparable quality. If any is subpar, it should be upgraded to match the other two. If one is significantly better, it will largely be wasted. So the question is, are you a rebel photographer or a white lens photographer?
Apr 3, 2014 10:36:34 #
Kit lenses today are great unless you try to use them at the extrems. The middle f stops give great quility. I would worry about photo skills unless your lens wont do waht you want it to. Like low light or macro or if you need a longer or wider lens. If you need to shoot in low light a "white lens" will be a great improvement. If you are shooting at f/8 it will not and be a lot more to carry around. - Dave
Apr 3, 2014 11:46:11 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
In general I agree that you should work with what you've got and learn to use it well... find out what you feel is lacking, and then look into adding a bit at a time. Still, it doesn't hurt to think about what you might want, down the road.
The 18-135mm offers a nice range of focal lengths, from moderate wide to moderate telephoto. It's also got Image Stabilization, which will help you get a steady shot with slower shutter speeds that might be necessary in lower light situations, by counteracting slight camera shake. However, IS can't do anything to help with blur due to subject movement at slower shutter speeds. For that, you need to use higher ISOs and faster shutter speeds.
Another factor is focus speed and a lens' tracking ability. The 18-135mm IS uses a micro motor, which isn't particularly fast or good at tracking. You can get the best out of it by using only the center AF point on your camera, which is more sensitive than the other eight AF points. The 18-135mm "STM" has a moderately better AF drive (stepper motor) and any of the Canon USM lenses (or third party equivalents) woudl be be even better yet.
DANCERS = indoor and stage lighting = large aperture lenses and higher ISOs. Learn to use your camera up to ISO 3200 and 6400 (shoot RAW, overexpose slightly, up to +2/3 stop, post process with extra noise reduction applied).
Lenses: EF-S 17-55/2.8, EF 24-70/2.8 II, EF 70-200/2.8 IS II. Fast zooms are bigger, heavier and expensive... and the best any of them can do is f2.8. So you also might want to look at prime lenses such as 35/2 IS, 50/1.4, 85/1.8,135/2. These are one to two stops faster than any zoom, yet more affodable. For dance you will need fast focusing lenses that track well, too... So stick with USM lenses (or third party equivalent such as Sigma HSM or Tamron USD).
WILDLIFE = lots of telephoto reach, though just how much depends upon whether we're photographing elephants or humming birds. The small the critter, likely the longer the focal length that will be needed.
Low light will be less of a concern most of the time, but too slow a lens (not large enough aperture) can at times make for problems, early morning and evening, when wildlife can be more active. It's nice to have on any lens, but I especially encourage image stabilization with longer focal lengths. There are many zooms and primes that you might consider, for example:
Canon 100-400 IS
Sigma 120-400 OS
Sigma 150-500 OS
Tamron 150-600 VC
Canon EF 300/4 IS (works well w/ 1.4X teleconverter too)
Canon EF 400/5.6 (not stabilized)
These are the more affordable long telephotos, but they start at about $900 and go up from there to about $1700.
All the above are USM or third party equivalent, too, which will be useful since wildlife photogrpahy also frequently needs fast focusing and good tracking capabilities.
You get what you pay for (and are willing to carry around)... For example, an arguably more versatile lens than any of the above is the Sigma 120-300/2.8 OS. It's f2.8, so more usable in low light than any of the above. It's also usable with both 1.4X and 2X teleconverters, so can serve as up to an effective 600mm. But it's bigger, heavier and costlier: $3600 for the lens alone. Still, that seems almost cheap in comparison to some of the truly premium lenses such as Canon 500/4 IS Mark II for $10,500 or Canon 200-400/4 IS with built-in 1.4X teleconverter for $11,800.
ARTY ENDEAVORS = ?
There are all sorts of specialized lenses: Very large aperture for shallow depth of field effects. Macro for extreme close-ups. Tilt-Shift for focal plane and perspective control effects. Even soft focus for dreamy portraits and more.
We really need to know more about what you are trying to accomplish, before we can advise.
The 18-135mm offers a nice range of focal lengths, from moderate wide to moderate telephoto. It's also got Image Stabilization, which will help you get a steady shot with slower shutter speeds that might be necessary in lower light situations, by counteracting slight camera shake. However, IS can't do anything to help with blur due to subject movement at slower shutter speeds. For that, you need to use higher ISOs and faster shutter speeds.
Another factor is focus speed and a lens' tracking ability. The 18-135mm IS uses a micro motor, which isn't particularly fast or good at tracking. You can get the best out of it by using only the center AF point on your camera, which is more sensitive than the other eight AF points. The 18-135mm "STM" has a moderately better AF drive (stepper motor) and any of the Canon USM lenses (or third party equivalents) woudl be be even better yet.
DANCERS = indoor and stage lighting = large aperture lenses and higher ISOs. Learn to use your camera up to ISO 3200 and 6400 (shoot RAW, overexpose slightly, up to +2/3 stop, post process with extra noise reduction applied).
Lenses: EF-S 17-55/2.8, EF 24-70/2.8 II, EF 70-200/2.8 IS II. Fast zooms are bigger, heavier and expensive... and the best any of them can do is f2.8. So you also might want to look at prime lenses such as 35/2 IS, 50/1.4, 85/1.8,135/2. These are one to two stops faster than any zoom, yet more affodable. For dance you will need fast focusing lenses that track well, too... So stick with USM lenses (or third party equivalent such as Sigma HSM or Tamron USD).
WILDLIFE = lots of telephoto reach, though just how much depends upon whether we're photographing elephants or humming birds. The small the critter, likely the longer the focal length that will be needed.
Low light will be less of a concern most of the time, but too slow a lens (not large enough aperture) can at times make for problems, early morning and evening, when wildlife can be more active. It's nice to have on any lens, but I especially encourage image stabilization with longer focal lengths. There are many zooms and primes that you might consider, for example:
Canon 100-400 IS
Sigma 120-400 OS
Sigma 150-500 OS
Tamron 150-600 VC
Canon EF 300/4 IS (works well w/ 1.4X teleconverter too)
Canon EF 400/5.6 (not stabilized)
These are the more affordable long telephotos, but they start at about $900 and go up from there to about $1700.
All the above are USM or third party equivalent, too, which will be useful since wildlife photogrpahy also frequently needs fast focusing and good tracking capabilities.
You get what you pay for (and are willing to carry around)... For example, an arguably more versatile lens than any of the above is the Sigma 120-300/2.8 OS. It's f2.8, so more usable in low light than any of the above. It's also usable with both 1.4X and 2X teleconverters, so can serve as up to an effective 600mm. But it's bigger, heavier and costlier: $3600 for the lens alone. Still, that seems almost cheap in comparison to some of the truly premium lenses such as Canon 500/4 IS Mark II for $10,500 or Canon 200-400/4 IS with built-in 1.4X teleconverter for $11,800.
ARTY ENDEAVORS = ?
There are all sorts of specialized lenses: Very large aperture for shallow depth of field effects. Macro for extreme close-ups. Tilt-Shift for focal plane and perspective control effects. Even soft focus for dreamy portraits and more.
We really need to know more about what you are trying to accomplish, before we can advise.
Apr 3, 2014 14:02:30 #
MT Shooter wrote:
You could easily put a white lens on the rebel and improve your image quality over the kit lenses. As well as have the lens already should you ever consider moving up to a full frame body. Canon does not build "L" lenses in EFS mount, only EF mounts, but they will all work just fine for you.
Thank you MT. I will save the info!
Apr 3, 2014 14:05:14 #
amehta wrote:
I think the most efficient results are when the photographer, camera, and lens are of comparable quality. If any is subpar, it should be upgraded to match the other two. If one is significantly better, it will largely be wasted. So the question is, are you a rebel photographer or a white lens photographer?
Yes, true. I am the weak link here. I am studying. Thank you for responding
Apr 3, 2014 14:12:15 #
wilsondl2 wrote:
Kit lenses today are great unless you try to use them at the extrems. The middle f stops give great quility. I would worry about photo skills unless your lens wont do waht you want it to. Like low light or macro or if you need a longer or wider lens. If you need to shoot in low light a "white lens" will be a great improvement. If you are shooting at f/8 it will not and be a lot more to carry around. - Dave
I was using "white lens" as the top of the spectrum really. I use mostly f/5-8 in AV but experiment with the TV at the dances (not stage lights, but lights basically off with peripheral lighting). Working hard on photo skills! thanks for help!
Apr 3, 2014 14:27:42 #
amfoto1 wrote:
In general I agree that you should work with what ... (show quote)
WOW!! that is a great lot of directed info! I appreciate it. Gonna copy and print to save.
I have switched to center pt focusing. Big difference! and I look particularly at the IS--helps me a lot. I switched to RAW for all actually, will shoot with the higher ISO, higher shutter and figure how to overexpose(?) on Saturday dance. It is not stage lighting--lights off "mood" in an auditorium with multiple mostly florescent lighting. Horrible. I have been thinking about prime--not sure yet which.
Lots of food for thought! thanks so much!
Apr 3, 2014 14:50:37 #
amehta
Loc: Boston
dancing2flower wrote:
Yes, true. I am the weak link here. I am studying. Thank you for responding
Keep studying, keep shooting, and you'll know when you're really ready to upgrade the gear, when that is the limitation.
Apr 3, 2014 15:17:40 #
amehta wrote:
Keep studying, keep shooting, and you'll know when you're really ready to upgrade the gear, when that is the limitation.
:thumbup:
Apr 3, 2014 19:55:53 #
I have the 70-300L and it's fantastic. I understand that the non-L 70-300 is also a good lens
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.