Buying a new lens for my DSLR camera

Though the IS makes up for the lack of another f-stop in low light conditions, I prefer this Tamron 28-75 as my main street-photography, walk-around lens. Because it can stay at f/2.8 at all focal lengths, which is really important for me when I’m setting exposure. I hate having my lens wide open, only to zoom in and have it change.

I also second recommendations for the 50mm and 35mm. I have four lenses, and the tamron and those two primes are three of them.

The last one I have is a Tamron 17-50, f/2.8, which I use for wide angle stuff, or indoors when I can’t back up.

I’ve got a Pentax k-7 my Dad left me. Does anyone know of a low-cost <2.8 50mm lens? I’m using a 18-50mm 2.8 lens as my walking around/low light lens but am looking for a cheap 1.8 or so.

How do you find that as a walkabout lens? I’ve been using the original Canon kit lens for some time, and would like something faster.

EDIT: After reading stepsongrapes comments below, I’ll just note that I have an older Rebel, and the kit lens does not have IS.

As with almost all lenses, it really comes down to what you want to spend. That Tamron looks like an excellent lens. As you say, the non-static aperature can be really annoying.

In the 200-300 price range, I find the upper-end kit lens hard to beat for value. The USM makes for a fast focus and the IS makes zoomed in, off-the-hip shooting doable. The IS also makes up, somewhat, for the smaller aperature by compensating for the longer shutters.

I regret buying the Tamron 17-50, 2.8 VC. I should have bought the original non-stabilized version. It’s better optically. Lightroom takes care of a lot of the distortion problems, but it’s contrast, I think, that make me not like the VC version.

Still, other than Canon’s version, it was the cheapest 2.8 with stabilization, which I needed for video work. My lens buying decisions have been a lot of missteps except for the 85mm 1.8. I love that lens.

A lot of the original (non-stabilized) Tamron 17-50/2.8 lenses have autofocussing issues (back focus usually). It is a good idea to test thoroughly before buying one. Other than that, an excellent lens, if a bit bulky. Qualitywise only the Canon 17-55/2.8 IS beats it.

I’ve been pretty lucky with lens buying and don’t regret any of them. All of them are Canon.

17-55mm/2.8, 100-400mm 4.5-5.6 L, 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, 50mm/1.8, 85mm/1.8.

Of course, given the price of some of them (particularly the first three), they had better be pretty darn good.

Our (well, my wife’s, I hardly ever get off her hands) walking around lens is the 24-105 F4 L, on a full frame (5DII) Tis awesome. The 17-55/2.8 would be closest for a DX frame I guess

The 100/2.8 mm macro gets much more use than a 70-300 zoom we have, because a macro (60mm macro for DX) is also a great portrait lens.

I rented the 10-22mm for five days and fell in love with it. It went straight to the top of my wish list.

You may want to have a look at the Tokina 11-16/2.8 which is around the same price.
This lens is so good that people even mod it to PL mount for use with cinema cameras.

So not to be a total cheap ass but what is the used market like? Is it even worth it or just better to get it new?

I have friends who’ve made some great buys used - but you need to be able to handle and try the lens before buying, and you need to know what to look for.

A lens that have been dropped can look intact on the outside, but be totally busted (that happened, when I dropped my 70-300mm… it did rattle when I shook it, so a half way competent buyer would have found out)

It’s like the used car market in pricing:

You can buy lenses used from a reputable used equipment broker such as http://www.keh.com and you will save hundreds of dollars on high-end glass and the quality and condition will be exactly as they describe.

Or, you can go to craigslist and ebay and save about 10%-15% more, but you won’t be sure what you’re getting unless the seller is local and you’re able to inspect the lens in person.

I buy lenses used when I can. The last lens that I bought new was a 120mm f/4 macro lens for my Mamiya 645. It cost me about $2000. That lens today can be bought like-new, the sharpest glass you can !@#4ing find on the planet … for about $400.

OK this might be another retarded question but are all the canon lenses compatible with my Canon? I am going to guess yes but who the hell knows.

I’m more familiar with Nikon, but from what I can remember, yes, all new lenses will work with your XT. The mount you specifically take is the EF-S, but EF lenses will work just as well. The thing to be wary of is EF-S lenses you might buy now, won’t work on a full frame camera should you upgrade to a pro or semi-pro body.

All cameras have a sensor in them it’s what makes them digital and it’s what records the light. The lens directs the light onto the sensor the sensor translates the light into RGB pixels. Most consumer level D-SLRs have what’s known as a “crop sensor” while professional level D-SLRs have a full frame sensor. Full frame sensors are bigger, and are roughly the same size as the traditional 35mm film. Crop sensors are smaller. I’m not too sure on the actual science of it all, but the general difference is in the amount of pixels that are packed into a given area. Allowing for a bigger surface area for the pixels and to spread them out means you get better quality, so professionals will go for full frame sensors, most DPReview information charts give a rating on pixel density (this could be all wrong, but it’s the idiots guide to it that’s been told to me many times.) The bigger sensor is of course more difficult to make, which is partly why pro-bodies are so much more expensive.

When it comes to lenses, there can be two general types. One type for full frame sensors and one for crop sensors. Crop lenses won’t work on full frame sensors. Because the crop sensor is smaller, it means the crop lens has to redirect the light to smaller area, this makes them easier and cheaper to make, but it also means that if they were put on a full frame sensor, the light wouldn’t extend the full way around the sensor. However, because full frame lenses direct a greater area of light onto the crop sensor, it’s fine to use with the smaller sensor. However the trade off is that because they’re directing a greater area of light onto a smaller surface, some of the “image” gets cut off. It’s not recorded in less detail by the sensor, it’s just the sensor is recording a smaller area than what the lens can actually send, hence “crop.” Following from that a lens that’s rated at 300mm, actually becomes in effective a 450mm(480mm on Canon because they’re 1.6 crop factor) lens on a crop body, because the smaller sensor has the effect of zooming in on a smaller area. It records it in no less detail, because the light isn’t actually made of pixels, it just means that you get a greater telefocal ability than the lens would give on a full frame sensor. This can work out for you if you typically demand greater reach with your lenses. But conversely, if you prefer wide angle shots it means where say you would use a 17mm lens on a full frame sensor body, you now need a 12mm lens on the crop body. This all means that if you see yourself upgrading to a professional level camera in the future (within ten years or so) any saving you make on EF-S lenses might be a bad thing because you’d have to dump/replace them all when you upgrade to the full frame body. I wouldn’t worry about it though, unless you’re already eyeing up a full frame body or have plans to get into photography at a professional level.

But yeah, all in all, any new lens you buy with a Canon mount should work your camera, even if it’s not made by Canon. If you’re looking into second hand lenses, most recent ones should work but you should be careful in checking if autofocus technology and the like makes a difference with off-brand lenses. If you’re looking at lenses 15+ years old, you probably need to check all the options, even if you’re buying Canon brand lenses.

Oh damn thanks! I know I have a lot to learn but thanks so much for all the information.