Can't afford to waste $$ so which way to go
Oct 20, 2014 13:39:01 #
Was into phtography (Canon A1's) back in the 80's and 90's then kinda moved away from it. Got back into it last year and, being happy with the brand, bought the Canon EOS T4i kit with the Canon 55-250mm lens.
Being completely new to digital photgraphy I purchased a couple of books (suggested by this site) but try as I may, I just can't get anything like what I consider good pics from the subject lens. The pics always seem to come out soft and I want nice sharp pics even at full tele.
Looked at various reviews and it seems this lens has a reputation of being a "kit lens" and therefore not that great a performer.
I don't have a whole stack of $$ to throw away "testing" other lenses. Looked at various other lenses such as Sigma and Tamron but having lost touch with the industry these days, just have really no idea of which way to go to get a reasonably priced lens that produces sharp results.
Suggestions please.
Being completely new to digital photgraphy I purchased a couple of books (suggested by this site) but try as I may, I just can't get anything like what I consider good pics from the subject lens. The pics always seem to come out soft and I want nice sharp pics even at full tele.
Looked at various reviews and it seems this lens has a reputation of being a "kit lens" and therefore not that great a performer.
I don't have a whole stack of $$ to throw away "testing" other lenses. Looked at various other lenses such as Sigma and Tamron but having lost touch with the industry these days, just have really no idea of which way to go to get a reasonably priced lens that produces sharp results.
Suggestions please.
Oct 20, 2014 13:45:25 #
Although I have a 50mm f/1.8, 85mm f/1.8, and a 70-300 f/4-5.6, the one I use most often for everything from landscapes to portraits is the Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3.
This lens (in my humble opinion) is crisp and sharp, and it's almosalways the lens on my Canon T3i. I think I paid around $300 for it, but I'm sure there are lower prices now.
Good luck to you, and happy shooting!
This lens (in my humble opinion) is crisp and sharp, and it's almosalways the lens on my Canon T3i. I think I paid around $300 for it, but I'm sure there are lower prices now.
Good luck to you, and happy shooting!
Oct 20, 2014 13:46:37 #
What is your budget? Sigma's new lenses are very good and frequently have a very good cost/performance. But a budget would help to get better answers
Oct 20, 2014 13:47:27 #
Oct 20, 2014 14:09:25 #
UGUSA wrote:
Was into phtography (Canon A1's) back in the 80's ... (show quote)
If you really love photography; there is no waste!!!
Oct 20, 2014 14:24:00 #
UGUSA wrote:
Was into phtography (Canon A1's) back in the 80's ... (show quote)
I did a little checking around and the lens sells for around 400 now. But I wouldn't be afraid to buy used from a REPUTABLE dealer like B&H, Adorama or KEH or Cameta Camera. They all stand behind their return statements with no questions. Good Luck and let us know what you decided and then post some shots with it.
Oct 20, 2014 14:34:28 #
UGUSA wrote:
Being completely new to digital photgraphy I purchased a couple of books (suggested by this site) but try as I may, I just can't get anything like what I consider good pics from the subject lens. The pics always seem to come out soft and I want nice sharp pics even at full tele.
Being completely new to digital photgraphy I purchased a couple of books (suggested by this site) but try as I may, I just can't get anything like what I consider good pics from the subject lens. The pics always seem to come out soft and I want nice sharp pics even at full tele.
It may be your lens, but then again it may not. Read this article from Ken Rockwell:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/unsharp.htm
Rule out all of the non-lens things that could cause softness before spending $$ on a new lens. But I'm definitely in the camp of spending what you need to spend to get what you want and not settling for cheap. If you want sharp, then read lens reviews and get what you want. It will be worth it when you see the results.
Oct 20, 2014 15:25:01 #
dsmeltz wrote:
Also what you like to shoot would help. Landscapes? Portraits? Macro?
The pics I'm most critical of are when I'm shooting, for example, kids soccer. Practically all of this is done at max tele, with the camera on auto everything, but set for "sports"
Oct 20, 2014 15:26:31 #
.....If you really love photography; there is no waste!!!..."
Disagree......throwing away good $$ after "bad" lenses is in my opinion, waste.
Disagree......throwing away good $$ after "bad" lenses is in my opinion, waste.
Oct 20, 2014 15:27:15 #
".......I did a little checking around and the lens sells for around 400 now......"
Sorry, but which lens were you referring to?
Sorry, but which lens were you referring to?
Oct 20, 2014 15:30:14 #
mdsiamese wrote:
It may be your lens, but then again it may not. Read this article from Ken Rockwell:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/unsharp.htm
Rule out all of the non-lens things that could cause softness before spending $$ on a new lens. But I'm definitely in the camp of spending what you need to spend to get what you want and not settling for cheap. If you want sharp, then read lens reviews and get what you want. It will be worth it when you see the results.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/unsharp.htm
Rule out all of the non-lens things that could cause softness before spending $$ on a new lens. But I'm definitely in the camp of spending what you need to spend to get what you want and not settling for cheap. If you want sharp, then read lens reviews and get what you want. It will be worth it when you see the results.
Had a quick browse through this, thanks for posting. A lot to think about and test, especially all the remarks and information about issues with digital camera results vs. analogue.
Also especially worthy of not in the article was the point that brand name lenses pretty much always do better then a similarly priced aftermarket lens! Important point to note in my case seing as I was considering getting into the aftermarket stuff to cure my "problem".
Oct 20, 2014 15:52:46 #
UGUSA wrote:
Also especially worthy of not in the article was the point that brand name lenses pretty much always do better then a similarly priced aftermarket lens! Important point to note in my case seing as I was considering getting into the aftermarket stuff to cure my "problem".
Also especially worthy of not in the article was the point that brand name lenses pretty much always do better then a similarly priced aftermarket lens! Important point to note in my case seing as I was considering getting into the aftermarket stuff to cure my "problem".
Take all reviewers with a grain of salt, we are all colored by our personal preferences and Ken is no exception. There are people who will disagree with Ken about his comments about non-Nikon or non-Canon lenses, although I tend to agree with him for certain lenses. I have friends that love their Sigmas and Tamrons, it really is going to be lens dependent.
You have to thoroughly check out the lens before buying, possibly even renting it first. Look on Amazon and read all of the reviews, google for other reviews. You'll get a wide variety of opinions, but you should find some sample images for comparison.
I always try to find sample images of a lens I am considering. I have found flickr to be invaluable for this. Many people include the exif data from their camera which can contain the lens. If I search for 14-24mm I will get images from the Nikon 14-24mm lens. Example images will give you a better idea of the lens' capabilities.
Oct 20, 2014 16:11:30 #
Ugusa, you don't give a lot to go on.
Personally I would find it tough to do a lot of photography with just one lens.
If I were to have just ONE lens it would be a Canon efs 15-85. It's a great all-around lens at around $600. Not real long but decently wide.
If I could add a second lens it would be a very fast prime.
But I don't have just two lenses and wouldn't want to be in those shoes. Good luck
SS
Personally I would find it tough to do a lot of photography with just one lens.
If I were to have just ONE lens it would be a Canon efs 15-85. It's a great all-around lens at around $600. Not real long but decently wide.
If I could add a second lens it would be a very fast prime.
But I don't have just two lenses and wouldn't want to be in those shoes. Good luck
SS
Oct 20, 2014 16:52:17 #
SharpShooter wrote:
Ugusa, you don't give a lot to go on.
Personally I would find it tough to do a lot of photography with just one lens.
If I were to have just ONE lens it would be a Canon efs 15-85. It's a great all-around lens at around $600. Not real long but decently wide.
If I could add a second lens it would be a very fast prime.
But I don't have just two lenses and wouldn't want to be in those shoes. Good luck
SS
Personally I would find it tough to do a lot of photography with just one lens.
If I were to have just ONE lens it would be a Canon efs 15-85. It's a great all-around lens at around $600. Not real long but decently wide.
If I could add a second lens it would be a very fast prime.
But I don't have just two lenses and wouldn't want to be in those shoes. Good luck
SS
Sorry, I do have more than one lens......Canon 50mm 1.5....Canon 18 - 55mm 3.5-5.6......and the 55 - 250 which is the lens I have issues with.
I'll find a pic and send it for you guys to review.
Oct 20, 2014 16:55:30 #
".......Take all reviewers with a grain of salt......"
Hmmm, then which yardstick do we use? I mean, we could look at various reviews and just choose which review we like the soudn of??
Hmmm, then which yardstick do we use? I mean, we could look at various reviews and just choose which review we like the soudn of??
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.