Replace my stock 18-55mm on EOS1000D

J

jimxms

Messages
8
Edit My Images
No
Hi peeps,

I'm looking for a good quality lens to replace the stock 18-55mm that came with my EOS1000D.

The main things I'm looking for are:

- 'deep' depth of field. I do a lot of electronics photography where you have components sticking quite far up on a circuit board but i need as much as possible to be in focus.

- sharpness (i guess kinda related to above). My current lens shows its a cheap-o with blurred edges etc.

- ability to focus close-up (lens a couple of cm away from subject)....or ability to get in close with zoom without loosing depth of field (if this is possible?)

Help!
:(
 
jimxms said:
Hi peeps,

I'm looking for a good quality lens to replace the stock 18-55mm that came with my EOS1000D.

The main things I'm looking for are:

- 'deep' depth of field. I do a lot of electronics photography where you have components sticking quite far up on a circuit board but i need as much as possible to be in focus.

- sharpness (i guess kinda related to above). My current lens shows its a cheap-o with blurred edges etc.

- ability to focus close-up (lens a couple of cm away from subject)....or ability to get in close with zoom without loosing depth of field (if this is possible?)

Help!
:(
Click to expand...

Hi there

Sorry to say, but I think you are taking the wrong approach. For one, depth of field is not a lens function per say so you don't need to get a new lens to achieve more depth of field. Your current lens using an aperture of F16 or F22 should give plenty fo depth of field.

Although it is a natural characteristic of lenses that the closer you focus the less dpeth of field you get. So something that would allow you to get the lens 2cm from subject will not have more than a couple of mm depth of field.

I can't easily visualise exactly what you are looking to achieve - how about posting a shot up and pinting out what you would like to do better?

On the surface it sounds like you need a macro lens and a change in tehcnique. This would not work in the way described above but would give you results.
 
yes i think a macro lens is in order, possibly a tamron 90mm f2.8 macro. that should suit your needs. as for technique you just need to use a smaller aperture (bigger f number) something like f11
 
Assuming the same sensor size, focal length, aperture and distance of focus, depth of field will not vary lens to lens. Have a gander here http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html
There's fancy tilt-shift lenses where you can doo funny things to the focal plane to get maximum depth of field but these are seriously expensive.

Sounds like you want some macro kit. Your options are:
- a dedicated macro lens.
- Macro filters. Magnifying glasses that screw on to your lenses filter thread basically.
- extension tubes. They hold a lens further from the camera which effectively increases magnification and allows closer focus. You'll either need ones with electronics that can let the camera communicate with the lens (otherwise you're stuck at widest aperture and on manual focus) or an old lens with manual aperture slection to use with a set of cheaper tubes with no electronics.
 
Here's an example guys. The red circle indicates the out of focus part that I would like to be in-focus.

This will probably make you guys frown at me, but I do all of my photography in automatic mode. As I'll take around 100 pictures of different parts of the subject I cant have the camera on manual as it just takes too long.

So I guess what I'm after is a lens that would give me as close to what I need while the cam is in auto (if thats possible?).

On another note, I bought a Sigma DC 17-70 cheap off a friend. The quality of the photo's is really good, but to get the depth of field i need I have to go totally un-zoomed and hold the lens right up against the subject (which casts nasty shadows even with my EX flash pointed at the ceiling).
 
There is no lens that will change how your camera behaves in auto. The only thing for it is to learn how to use the other modes. Aperture priority will suit you for most purposes. Pick a narrower aperture for a bigger depth of field. This will also give you s slower shutter speed (you're letting less light in) so you might need a tripod, depending on what light you're working in.

Have a play with this: http://www.kamerasimulator.se/eng/?page_id=2
 
A really good like for like but faster option is either the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 or the Tamron 17-50 f2.8.
 
TBH, using an SLR for this sreems pointless and using a compact would give you results nearer to what you want including a larger depth of field. On the other hand, you could get your SLR and 17-70, put it in Aperture priority (Av), set the aperture to f/11-16 and put it on a tripod and snap away. Automatic mode will not enable you to get the results you want.
 
Sam_G said:
TBH, using an SLR for this sreems pointless and using a compact would give you results nearer to what you want including a larger depth of field. On the other hand, you could get your SLR and 17-70, put it in Aperture priority (Av), set the aperture to f/11-16 and put it on a tripod and snap away. Automatic mode will not enable you to get the results you want.
Click to expand...


tbh the only reason I'm using an SLR is because I need an external flash for a lot of my photography.

After using my Panasonic DMC-TZ7 in good lighting and getting good results, it did get me thinking though. I wonder if i'd be better off with a crossover cam such as the Fuji S2000EXR which I could use an external flash on, but still get good results with compact-like ease?
 
Can you let us know what settings were used for that shot?
Focal length and aperture would help.

Also, what external flash solution are you using?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top