11-17-2010, 04:51 PM
[quote name='shagunsegan' timestamp='1290011611' post='4214']
Hi,
I have been going over the historic whirlwind of mind debats on getting a 1st DSLR. Now I have decided on the Canon 550D as the body I would get.
As for the lenses I have a few options is mind -
Canon 50mm 1.8 --- for sure
[/quote]
Personally I would SKIP this lens., Yes it is dirt cheap. Yes, if you get a copy that focussed well on your camera body, it can even get some decent results. But it is one focal length that makes little sense for your mentioned uses... it is mainly ok for portraits.
I would myself rather go for the Canon EF 35mm f2. Its focal length is MUCH more useful (standard focal length on APS-C), it is an accurate focusser, contrary to the 50mm f1.8.
[quote name='shagunsegan' timestamp='1290011611' post='4214']
And then gotta decide from -
Tamron 17-50mm non-VC/VC
Canon 55-250mm IS
Canon 70-300mm IS
Canon 18-200mm IS
Canon 18-135mm IS
So what should I get?? Considering that I would be using it all primarily for Travel photography, Nature. To be more precise landscapes, beaches, villages, roads, local people and more nature. No wildlife or sports for now.
And Im looking at around 1L. So that would be body+lens+accessories (tripod, bags, cards,flash).
PS - any other lens suggestion would be helpful too. And I am in India so getting stuff here is expensive and hence I would get all that I can in 1 go from the US.
[/quote]
I would skip the Tamron 17-50's, and go straight to the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC Macro or Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 EX DC OS HSM. The first offers no IS but is much better built than the Tamrons, has better optics than the Tamrons, and is more reliable/fast/silent in focussing than the Tamrons. The 2nd has IS and silent motor, and is even better optically.
Then I would get a telezoom to match.
Cheap and cheerful: Canon 55-250mm IS.
A bit better and a bit more tele reach: Canon 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM. A tad sharper at 300mm if a good copy on Canon: Tamron 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 VC USD.
Off white attention grabbing, less reach and something special in its rendering of images: Canon 70-200mm f4 L USM. More expensive sibling, sharper and with IS: Canon 70-200mm f4 L IS USM.
Hard to suggest which tele would be best for you, it is budget and use dependent. All mentioned teles are very good in their field.
Hi,
I have been going over the historic whirlwind of mind debats on getting a 1st DSLR. Now I have decided on the Canon 550D as the body I would get.
As for the lenses I have a few options is mind -
Canon 50mm 1.8 --- for sure
[/quote]
Personally I would SKIP this lens., Yes it is dirt cheap. Yes, if you get a copy that focussed well on your camera body, it can even get some decent results. But it is one focal length that makes little sense for your mentioned uses... it is mainly ok for portraits.
I would myself rather go for the Canon EF 35mm f2. Its focal length is MUCH more useful (standard focal length on APS-C), it is an accurate focusser, contrary to the 50mm f1.8.
[quote name='shagunsegan' timestamp='1290011611' post='4214']
And then gotta decide from -
Tamron 17-50mm non-VC/VC
Canon 55-250mm IS
Canon 70-300mm IS
Canon 18-200mm IS
Canon 18-135mm IS
So what should I get?? Considering that I would be using it all primarily for Travel photography, Nature. To be more precise landscapes, beaches, villages, roads, local people and more nature. No wildlife or sports for now.
And Im looking at around 1L. So that would be body+lens+accessories (tripod, bags, cards,flash).
PS - any other lens suggestion would be helpful too. And I am in India so getting stuff here is expensive and hence I would get all that I can in 1 go from the US.
[/quote]
I would skip the Tamron 17-50's, and go straight to the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC Macro or Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 EX DC OS HSM. The first offers no IS but is much better built than the Tamrons, has better optics than the Tamrons, and is more reliable/fast/silent in focussing than the Tamrons. The 2nd has IS and silent motor, and is even better optically.
Then I would get a telezoom to match.
Cheap and cheerful: Canon 55-250mm IS.
A bit better and a bit more tele reach: Canon 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM. A tad sharper at 300mm if a good copy on Canon: Tamron 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 VC USD.
Off white attention grabbing, less reach and something special in its rendering of images: Canon 70-200mm f4 L USM. More expensive sibling, sharper and with IS: Canon 70-200mm f4 L IS USM.
Hard to suggest which tele would be best for you, it is budget and use dependent. All mentioned teles are very good in their field.