Replacing Canon 18-55 kit lens and 50mm 1.8

J

Jimmyjango

Messages
19
Name
Joshua
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi, so i've been thinking of upgrading my EF-S 18-55 IS kit lens. I like the lens but heard some bad stuff with it. I've not really been able to experiment too much with it, as i mainly do indoor sports stuff with poor light which i use my 50 for.

I'd like some advice of which zoom lens to get (<£200 pref.) I would like to try some landscape maybe wildlife. Also going to do some husky racing action pics for a friend which i reckon a zoom would be better than a prime for. Also gonna give HDR images a crack. Basically a decent all rounder.

Also my 50mm 1.8. I'm wanting the 1.4 version, however i've heard mixed things between the canon version and the sigma. Considering I will be using it for boxing/mma, mostly indoor poor light sort of thing, which would you suggest?

Cheers.
 
Jimmy, for the budget, I think you're gonna struggle... a zoom in that price bracket is the 55-250, it matches with the 18-55 nicely. Neither are as good IQ wise as the nifty. I've been using the nifty on my 450d for some AmDram indoor, poor light shots, and it's performing nicely there, but you do have to get in close which might not suit well for your sports. Otherwise, you're gonna need a much more expensive lens I think. I've been looking myself, and what I'd like is way out of my price range.
 
for me, you have 3 options
1, the 55-250mm mentioned above (good lens but might be too slow)
2, scrap the idea of the 50mm f1.4 and try and stretch to the canon 70-200mm f4 non is
3, hello ebay..........
 
Jim.R said:
Unfortunately, I think you're gonna need more than one lens :(
Click to expand...

Haha, i think you're right! I guess i'm just looking for something a little better/more versatile than the kit lens. I'm still new to it all and just finding my bearings, learning!

The 70-200mm, do you think that will be fast enough? I'm talking very low light, and the 50 is fine as i'm usually canvas side. I mean fully open at 1.8 it was just alittle slower than i'd have liked. Not had it long so the times i have used it lights have been dire! (I was shooting 1600iso 1/200 large jpegs)

I may be able to go higher than £200 but it wouldn't be an immediate purchase.
 
If the 70-200 f/4 isnt fast enough, the 55-250 most definately wont be.
Your next choice would be the 70-200 f/2.8 and you might wanna sit to see the price of that one!

Scrap the 50mm 1.4 idea and invest in the 70-200 f/4. Get the IS if you can, but the normal one will do. That will cover your sport and Husky racing.
Maybe also get a wider prime like the 35 f/2 for your landscapes.
 
Replace your kit lens and nifty fifty with a Tamron 17-50 then hunt around for a cheapish 70-200 2.8, either Sigma or Tamron are available for half the price of the Canon version.
 
Bearing in mind no flash aswell, I just can't see anything but a prime being fast enough. 50mm is great ringside. However will have a look at both of those!

The huskey racing thing, I'm not too bothered about I wouldn't be doing it often. Been looking into hdr images and really liking the idea.

Also why a prime for landscape? I would have though zoom would be better to reduce cropping? Thanks for the help!
 
If the 50mm focal length is working well for you then the old adage "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" comes to mind, so just go for the 1.4 version.

If you have money left then you have two choices, landscape or wildlife/sled racing.

For landscape then the tamron 17-50 is fine, its a nice sharp lens and goes wide enough for me.
other than that your left with budget longer zooms such as the 55-250 as mentioned.

If you need longer indoors try the 85mm 1.8, its a cracking lens for the money.
 
Jimmyjango said:
Bearing in mind no flash aswell, I just can't see anything but a prime being fast enough.
Click to expand...

Huge apertures aren't the only solution for low light shots without flash. In fact, you need to be careful as opening it up too much may lead to the depth of field being too small and not getting everything you need in the shot in sharp focus.

Remember, you do have another option to keep the shutter speed high: higher ISO.
 
You're right with the depth of field! At 1.8 I have trouble tbh. However I read the 1.4 is sharper at the same arpertures. Also with the iso, I have a 450d which doesn't seem to go any higher than 1600. I read if I shoot it raw I can effectively do this post, is this true? I'd be worried as I would not be able to do test shots before the fight to judge the exposure and such. Wouldn't be great if when I got home none were usable.


When I get home I will look into the 17-50 and the 55-250. Would you say the tamron is much better than the kit lens?

At the min I'm not shooting raw, however I've just got lightroom so might get a couple more cards and try it.
 
Jimmyjango said:
However I read the 1.4 is sharper at the same arpertures.
Click to expand...

The 1.4 will most likely be sharper at 1.8, however only the in focus bits will be sharper. Shooting with the 50mm f/1.4 at f/1.8 will give you exactly the same DoF (the area that's in focus) as your 50mm f/1.8 will at that aperture.
If you use the f/1.4 wide open, you'll have an even shallower DoF.

There's a good article on DoF here and a neat little web page that lets you play with settings to see what affect they have on DoF here. The results from this can be surprising.

Jimmyjango said:
Also with the iso, I have a 450d which doesn't seem to go any higher than 1600. I read if I shoot it raw I can effectively do this post, is this true?
Click to expand...

I assume you're talking about underexposing the pic when taking it and upping the exposure in PP? Yes it can be done, but the exposiure adjustment will add noise. If you're already shooting af ISO 1600, the results probably won't be pretty.

High ISO is much better in cameras with larger sensors, so that's another potential route to take to solve your issues. Although as mentioned bofre, it might be worth sitting down before checking out the price of something like a 5dII :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top