Stupid q number 2!

B

bitchinhighheels

Messages
96
Edit My Images
Yes
Is it just me totally under whelmed by the 18-55 lens supplied with the 450D?

It just doesn't seem to really excel at any one thing. Though to be fair I have only had a quick play.

So my question is which lenses should I be looking at?

TIA.
 
When I bought my 450D I bought body only and got a Canon EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS USM and Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM and I've got to say I've loved using them both.

The 17-85mm is a great walk around lens and I've never regretted buying it. It's by no means the best lens you'll ever buy but as a first walk around it's 10x better than the kit one and will last you ages...
 
My first lens was the nifty fifty, what you mainly wanting to take photos off??
 
Mainly planes, cars, buildings and wildlife.

As said, I may be being unfair on the lens having only taken a few shots with it.
 
I still use my 18-55 supplied with my 350d several years ago. At first I was crotical of it, but now I find I get good results.

You need to give it a chance, use it at mid apertures and not in extreme circumstances.
 
MadFrankie said:
When I bought my 450D I bought body only and got a Canon EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS USM and Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM and I've got to say I've loved using them both.

The 17-85mm is a great walk around lens and I've never regretted buying it. It's by no means the best lens you'll ever buy but as a first walk around it's 10x better than the kit one and will last you ages...
Click to expand...

Change the 450D for a 400D and that's my first DSLR setup and the exact combo i used for a few years until giving the kit to my wife late last year. Covered everything i needed without being over the top expensive and very good quality pics
 
18-55 kit lens on a 450D is the newer IS version isn't it? That's a decent lens, and very good for the money. You'll have to spend a few hundred quid to get something significantly optically superior, eg Canon 17-55 2.8 for £750.

What's wrong with your kit lens? What focal length range are you looking for? What can't you do currently? Budget? If you are looking for something long to do planes and wildlife etc, that's a whole different question, but the Canon 70-300 IS is probably the best answer at £400. Or 55-250 for £200, or 100-400L for £1,200.
 
bitchinhighheels said:
Is it just me totally under whelmed by the 18-55 lens supplied with the 450D?

It just doesn't seem to really excel at any one thing. Though to be fair I have only had a quick play.

So my question is which lenses should I be looking at?

TIA.
Click to expand...

It's really just a starter lens. After a few months with my 450D, I'm already buying other lenses to replace it. I do hear the IS version is better than the non IS version, though.

The fact that it goes down to 18mm though is a nice introduction to wide angle after being stuck on compacts, which often only go down to 35mm!
 
you need something longer aswell for wildlife and far away stuff, the 55-250IS is meant to be good for the money. Theres one in the classifieds too :D
 
Trev Rich said:
The kit lens with the 450D is the IS version.. and I have some cracking images with it.
Click to expand...

It does suck quite badly wide open, but stop it down a bit and it's fine.
I've also noticed that if you stop it down too far (for landscapes etc...) that the IQ drops off again. This is due to difraction I believe.
 
david1701 said:
you need something longer aswell for wildlife and far away stuff, the 55-250IS is meant to be good for the money. Theres one in the classifieds too :D
Click to expand...

OP has posted on that thread already.
 
Nothing wrong with the kit lens per se, but as others have mentioned it's not at it's best when wide open, I've got two of the non-is ones in the loft that I've had some great shots off.

However, for a wider range of potential situations, I replaced my kit lens after 6 months or so with a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 and haven't looked back. The only thing in my bag that tops it Image quality wise is the nifty fifty (which I don't really use that much any more either.

For the longer ranges, the first lens I acquired was a really old Canon 70-300mm, I thought that was OK till I splashed out on a Tamron 70-300 instead. Loved using it till it died last month and have since replaced it with a Sigma 70-300 which has highlighted the fact that the Tamron wasn't actually that great (images were sharp enough but suffered - with hindsight) quite a lot of Chromatic Aberration. Not got this problem with the Sigma (which can be picked up second hand for under £100 now). If you're going new the 55-250IS has got some teriffic reviews and isn't that pricey, all things considered.
 
david1701 said:
you need something longer aswell for wildlife and far away stuff, the 55-250IS is meant to be good for the money. Theres one in the classifieds too :D
Click to expand...

I'm not convinced, looks plasticky and basically like a 'long' 18-55 to me... and the price is suspiciously reminiscent of our plastic fantastic friend the 18-55, also.
 
trencheel303 said:
I'm not convinced, looks plasticky and basically like a 'long' 18-55 to me... and the price is suspiciously reminiscent of our plastic fantastic friend the 18-55, also.
Click to expand...

55-250 is a great little lens with good IS and a flippin bargain at under £200. Perfect partner to the 18-55 kit lens. Nothing can touch it for the money. Anything better/longer is double the money, and more.
 
HoppyUK said:
OP has posted on that thread already.
Click to expand...

hadn't noticed that

trencheel303 said:
I'm not convinced, looks plasticky and basically like a 'long' 18-55 to me... and the price is suspiciously reminiscent of our plastic fantastic friend the 18-55, also.
Click to expand...

well its bloody cheap for its IQ, if you want something better look you're looking at a lot more money
 
trencheel303 said:
I'm not convinced, looks plasticky and basically like a 'long' 18-55 to me... and the price is suspiciously reminiscent of our plastic fantastic friend the 18-55, also.
Click to expand...

No reason to be put off - its fantastic lens! A quick search on here should confirm that. The IQ is in a totally different league to the 18-55. Have you seen pics taken with it?
 
Thanks all for the responses. Has made for some interesting reading. Going to have a bit more of a play with the lens and also going to invest in at least one new lens.

Anyone have any thoughts on this Canon EF75-300mm f/4.0-5.6III ?
 
bitchinhighheels said:
Thanks all for the responses. Has made for some interesting reading. Going to have a bit more of a play with the lens and also going to invest in at least one new lens.

Anyone have any thoughts on this Canon EF75-300mm f/4.0-5.6III ?
Click to expand...

Yes, don't. 55-250 is better. If you want longer and can spend more 70-300 IS is the one to go for. It's a better lens optically than the 55-250, and more robustly made. But it's twice the price. They come up used for about £300 quite often.
 
I quite like the kit lens to be honest :)
Yes it struggles a bit if pushed,but for most things its OK...
Not exactly L quality images,but it does what it says on the tin :thumbs:
 
bitchinhighheels said:
Thanks all for the responses. Has made for some interesting reading. Going to have a bit more of a play with the lens and also going to invest in at least one new lens.

Anyone have any thoughts on this Canon EF75-300mm f/4.0-5.6III ?
Click to expand...

The 75-300 is, generally, thought of as a poor lens and quite soft. As Hoppy states, both the 55-250 IS and the 70-300 are far far better. In fact you can get a new 55-250 for pretty much the same price as the 75-300, and the 55-250 IS has far superior IQ with very good image stablisation.

Dont get the 75-300 confused with the 70-300 IS, they are very different lenses!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top