Canon lens advice please for newbie

  • Thread starter Thread starter susie
  • Start date Start date
S

susie

Guest
Since having my point and click removed from my person by some little darling, I have been given a Canon 40D. It has an EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lens, an EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Zoom Telephoto Lens, and a 0.45X Wide Angle Lens that are either with it or he is getting from someone to go with it.

I will be mostly taking horsey pictures some will be in indoor arenas and up to 60 mtrs away, possibly not in the best light! Otherwise it will be sunsets and nature type things.

I don't have a lot of money to spend, but any pointers for lenses or anything else that would be useful additions as and when I can afford them would be much appreciated. I do have a book to try and learn about these cameras as at the moment I have no idea whatsoever about settings, so please treat me as the uneducated person that I am, and use simple terms!
 
by 'not a lot of money', can you stretch to around £300 as i'd be inclined to recommend a canon 70-200 F/4L lens, probably the best bang for buck lens that money can buy. You simply won't get anything faster (aperture) for anywhere near that kind of money, your next option would be the 70-200 F/2.8L which is around £1k, or therew's the sigma equivelent which is around the £600 mark i think.

I won't recommend a wide angle as the new 18-55 F/3.5-5.6 IS is supposed to be a great lens for the money and will do you till you need anything faster.
 
If the lighting is poor then I think you will be dissapointed with anything less then a f2.8 and at the distance you want then really your looking at a sigma 70-200 f2.8 .. Money low then a used one.... that will give you reach and low light use. ebay should be around 350-400 I would guess as there around 600 new...
 
I'd say hold fire on the money for now. The 40D is a lot of camera for someone coming from a point-and-click background, and those two lenses you've got will cover most focal lengths that you'll need.

Learn how to use the camera. Play with the lenses and work out what their strengths and weaknesses are. If and when you find that you're not able to take the kind of pictures you want to take, then you'll know what you need as an upgrade.

My experience: When I got my 350D, I bought the Sigma 18-200mm as an all-in-one walk-around lens. It's really great for that. But after a while I found that I sometimes wanted something wider, so I got the 10-22; and I sometimes wanted something that would work better for portraits and stuff in low light, so I got the 50 f/1.4. Currently I'm trying to photograph some of the birds that visit our garden, and I'm finding that the Sigma isn't long enough - and also that I'm a bit disappointed with the image quality when it's zoomed out to 200mm. So there could be some flavour of 70-200, or maybe even a 100-400, in my future. But you can see that all this is driven by identifying the linmitations of my existing kit.
 
A 40D.......lucky you!! I agree with StewartR....learn to use what you have before shelling out on other bits. If you really do a lot of indoor horsey things, then a faster lens should be the top of your list....any version of an f2.8 that has the reach you want and you can afford. Whilst the Canon 70-200 f2.8L is wonderful...its pricey.
 
I think the best lens on the market for a canon is the 70-200L is 2.8 and rather than go for the 100-400 (I have both) get a x2 or x1.4 which although this cuts down your aperture size it still maintains AF. I think the next best lens is the 24-70L lens, but you are talking dosh. For cheaper lenses that are good value try Tokina much malined, but nice lenses....Ian
 
Thanks for those suggestions, he should be bringing it round this weekend, so I will play with it first then decide what I need to get.

I must admit I did not realise until I saw your posts that it was such a good camera, I know it was nice but it sounds even better than I had thought! just hope I can learn how to use most of what it can do - at least it will last me for years and it sounds as if I can add lenses as and when I can afford them!
 
It is definitely a 40D - I would have probably been better off with something simpler but it was not me buying!! Lets hope I can learn enough to get some pictures that do it justice.
 
The 40D is a fabulous camera, capable of cracking photos if teemed up with the right hands and right lenses.

For low light horsey photos you'll need distance and fast aperture and these tend to come at a price.

The Sigma 70-200 f2.8 is a possible contender, or the Sigma 100-300 f4, sacrifices one stop for longer reach. Canny buying on the secondhand market may help.

All these types of lenses tend to be a bit bulky and heavy though.
 
andrewc said:
The Sigma 70-200 f2.8 is a possible contender, or the Sigma 100-300 f4, sacrifices one stop for longer reach.
Click to expand...

Or possibly the Sigma 70-200 2.8 teamed up with a Sigma 1.4x converter. This will give you 280mm at f4 but you can still then have up to 200mm at 2.8;)
 
I MAG images said:
I think the best lens on the market for a canon is the 70-200L is 2.8 and rather than go for the 100-400 (I have both) get a x2 or x1.4 which although this cuts down your aperture size it still maintains AF. I think the next best lens is the 24-70L lens, but you are talking dosh. For cheaper lenses that are good value try Tokina much malined, but nice lenses....Ian
Click to expand...

If you use the F2.8 with the x2 adapter then it stops down to an F5.6, so it has the same effective maximum aperture as the 100-400. The 100-400 is gonna cost u around a 1,000 but the 70-200 will be around 1400 with the x2 adapter.

60 Meters is a fair distance and with poor light I can not see F5.6 cutting the mustard so the 70-200 F2.8 would be the better lens.
 
WildWalker said:
If you use the F2.8 with the x2 adapter then it stops down to an F5.6, so it has the same effective maximum aperture as the 100-400. The 100-400 is gonna cost u around a 1,000 but the 70-200 will be around 1400 with the x2 adapter.

Thanks for the info, as I have both lenses and a x2 converter I know what they do. The point I was trying to make was that the 70-200 is a better lens and even if it is 400 quid dearer its worth it.....Ian
Click to expand...
 
I MAG images said:
Thanks for the info, as I have both lenses and a x2 converter I know what they do. The point I was trying to make was that the 70-200 is a better lens and even if it is 400 quid dearer its worth it.....Ian
Click to expand...

To you yes. I made an observation on your post for Susie's (the thread originator) benefit. I realised you already know what your lenses do and their limitations, but I figured I would point that out for other readers benefit :)

What I am saying is I wasnt trying to be funny or get in to an argument, if that is how I sounded :(

If you look at the characteristics of the lenses, the specifications only has the 70-200mm lens slightly better at the telephoto end, as the wide end, the 70mm falls off quite sharply, I guess thats to be expected as 70mm is a fair bit wider than 100mm.
 
Thanks for that, I think from all your replies itwill be easier if I stick to the shorter arenas, which would bring the maximum distance possible in to about 45mtrs which sounds more realistic for getting decent shots.

Think I need to do some reading on lens speeds as logically (to me anyway) they are all numbered in reverse, and the amount of light they let in is in reverse order as well :lol:

I do have someone who is going to take me out and show me how to use an SLR though so thats going to be a big help.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top