Canon lenses

[RobStubbs]

I'm just about to get an EOS 350D and I've seen a number of comments on the poor quality of the lens kits that they come with. Can anyone elaborate and advise on alternative and better lenses ? I already have a non digital EOS lens 28-80 so perhaps I can do without getting a lens at all at this stage (?).

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Rob.

[Lid]

It somewhat depends on what you want to photograph.

 

Because the camera has a 1.6 crop factor, you lose out on wide angle, so it is worth considering something like the Canon 17-85 IS, although it is a bit pricey.

 

If you go to SIGMA or TAMRON, you can get an 18-200 superzoom for under £300. They aren't perfect, but many owners swear by them.

 

Incidentally now the 30D has been released, why not consider a 20D instead of a 350?

Edited April 12, 2006 by Lid

[RobStubbs]

Incidentally now the 30D has been released, why not consider a 20D instead of a 350?

 

The 20D has also crossed my mind, I'm just unsure of the 'extras' i.e. is it worth me spending another 200 quid ?

 

Rob.

[Lid]

Definitely worth it in my view. I do know the differences by heart but a quick search (here) reveals :

 

slightly bigger and sturdier body

higher ISO (up 3200)

faster start up (I think)

fantastic high ISO performance even at 1600 there is relatively little noise

better auto focus

faster frame rate

faster max shutter speed

larger buffer

PC socket

more custom functions

Pentaprism (versus pentamirror)

Better batteries

Rear control dial

Better CMOS sensor

 

[RobStubbs]

Lid,

Cheers for that - now I'll have to do some more head scratching.

 

Rob.

Edited April 12, 2006 by RobStubbs

[Westie]

I'm interested myself in getting my first digital slr. Been doing a lot of head scratchin over the 350d or 20d and the way I'm thinking now is to wait a little longer and pick up a 20d body and sort out a good couple of lenses. Nothing worse than buying and 12 months later itching for an upgrade. I'm very much a novice, but with a 2 year old roaming the house, I like the idea of a sturdy build on the camera. But then I think - get the 30d...

 

I can't see the wife buying into my reasoning though.

[Lid]

The 30D is really just a 20D+. Apart from the bigger LCD, the other extra features above the 20D are nothing special. However because of the 30D, you can get a bargain 20D. The Canon Outlet centre on ebay often has them and you can get them pretty cheap with a year's warranty too.

[RobStubbs]

What sort of prices are we looking at for the 20D ? I've seen the 350D with lens for under 500.

 

Cheers,

 

Rob.

[Lid]

It's hard to say what some of them will go for. A few weeks a go I tracked a few with the 17-85 IS lens selling at around £800, bearing in mind that is a £350 lens!

 

Have a look here and maybe track a couple to see what they go for.

Edited April 13, 2006 by Lid

[Gillies]

The Canon Lens and Camera thing can be a mine field :-) this is my take on it. All three cameras will do a great job, its just about balancing the pennies - all three are 8 megapixel cameras, and the main differences between them are minimal

 

350D to 20D

 

7 autofocus points / 9 autofocus points

2.8 frames per second upto 14 shots / 5 frames per second up to 23 shots

Smaller Body / Larger Body

 

20D to 30D

 

1.8" Screen / 2.5" Screen

No Spot Metering / Spot Metering

 

There are really no dramatic differences between the 350D and 30D, if I was buying one of those cameras just now, I would have to think very hard about it --- is it worth saving a few pennies and putting it towards a decent lens instead!

 

Dont be to put off by the kit lens - its extremely cheap, and you might get a good copy, Canon and Sigma have major quality control issues - two exact copies of the same lens may produce very different results. My kit lens, I only really use now out fishing - it has so far survived numerous soakings in by the spray from waves at sea , falling out of my hands, and more recently rolling down a hill in the snow with lens cap off, and turning into a snowball! I still do sell a few prints from the lens, at sizes up to 30"x20" ....... so, I'd say get the kit lens and hopefully you get a good copy of it ..... to get another lens of that range, you have to pay a few pounds.

 

For prosumer lenses (from Canon - ones that are not the more expensive pro L lens series) read up about a lens you are interested in before you buy it, a lens may say that it has a range from Nmm to Nmm, but the results at both ends of the range might not be great at the more well used apertures.

 

Read reviews on the lens before you buy, and read what other people have though - dpreview.com and fredmiranda.com are great resources.

 

If your on a budget, Id suggest getting the kit lens with what ever camera you choose, a Canon 17-85 IS or a Canon 28-135mm IS for a walk around lens, for a larger zoom the Canon and Sigma ones all seem to deliver the same kind of results I hear, getting one thats sharp around 300mm as it is, say at 100mm can be tricky .... but results are still extremely usable.

 

Gillies