What other lens

mercmanuk

mercmanuk

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,822
Edit My Images
Yes
I have a canon 400D(happy with), Canon 18-55mm lens with reverse mount for Macro (happy with) Sigma 28-300mm lens (happy with) what other lens should i have i my bag, i like the full range of photography, but preferences on Macro and close up, with portrait, and landscapes coming second and third, what other lens and filters should i be looking at, just need a all purpose kit for a armature tog

Regards Mark.
 
You've somewhat answered your own question as to the type of lens, I think: in terms of a recommendation - if macro is your thing, with portraiture up there too, I would suggest the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 Macro, which is excellent at the former and no slouch at the latter :)
 
EF 100 Macro for me. Shooting 2 birds with 1 bullet, I think the 100mm is better than 150mm.

150mm is too long for portraiture, but there's no limit of focal length you are allowed to use for portraits. But then I think 100mm is more balanced for both macro and portraits.
 
I agree that the Sigma 150 is not best suited to portrait, but as you appear to be keeping your lenses at the budget range, I'd get the Sigma 105mm and save some cash over the Canon 100mm (the difference in quality is negligable)...
 
Hi thanks a lot, price is a factor, i like both lenses but a third would kind of complete my kit for know many thanks. are they both available as autofocus as i thought the canon was a EF-S...ignorance showing please be kind.

Regards Mark.
 
But before you splash out, you have to weigh the pros and cons of each lens. The Canon EF 100 Macro USM does not extend when you zoom in or out. It also has USM so its quiet, quicker to aouto focus which works well with Canon's AI Servo. Build quality is better. It also has internal focus ( I don't know about the Sigma or Tamron). Only thing is you have to pay for the lens hood as its not included.
Only winning point for the Sigma 105 and Tamron 90 are their prices, and that's it.
From what I've read before I bought my EF 100, Canon is sharper than both Sigma and Tamron but very negligible.
I actually bought the Tamron 90 Macro first but returned it as it was very noisy and slow and the barrel extends, also it felt very plasticky.

But only you can decide.


These were my choices before:

All EF mount
Canon 100

Sigma 105

Sigma 70

Tamron 90
 
What Stobe says is very true, but if you're fairly new to photography, and cash is not in abundance, then you'd be an idiot to splash out on the more expensive Canon lens over the Tamron 90 or Sigma 105 (both equally as good as each other) if you can see past the external extension of the lens while focussing.
 
neo2810 said:
What Stobe says is very true, but if you're fairly new to photography, and cash is not in abundance, then you'd be an idiot to splash out on the more expensive Canon lens over the Tamron 90 or Sigma 105 (both equally as good as each other) if you can see past the external extension of the lens while focussing.
Click to expand...

My reasoning is better spend a little more now for better gear, than spend a little and later spend more to upgrade for better gear.

But I'm sure a lot of people are happy with the tamron and Sigma specially when it comes to image quality. But maybe let them try the better lens (canon) and I'm sure they won't like to go back.
 
Hi all i have taken into account all you have said and i am going to go with the?

1, Canon EF-S 60MM Macro f/2.8... try and grab a bargain off anywhere
2, Sigma 50mm or Sigma 105mm F/2.8 Macro, could buy new ? wife s approval
3, Tamron 90mm F2/2.8 Macro bargain off anywhere

I think these would suit me best many thanks for your input Quality over price, well i have a theory ..if you can take a good picture in the first place Quality must come second ,so price is the driver, but if i spot a bargain the canon will be on my 400d before you can say Canon. i may have to have image stabilization, as steadyness on my feet are in the past.

Regards Mark
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top