Newbie Needing Advice On A T4i Purchase

B

brancasterr

New member
Hey everyone,

First off, I've been browsing these forums for a while now and I must say that I've learned quite a bit through many of you. Thank you for that.

I just graduated college and the time has come for me to buy my own DSLR. I'm looking at buying the T4i as a starter. I know many people say to stay away from kit lenses, but I have a bit of extra cash and want it just to play around with. My question is: Should I splurge for the 18-135mm kit lens or just stick with the 18-55mm?

I'm thinking I'll stick with the 18-55mm and just pick up a nice prime lens -- say 50mm F/1.8 (or something wider? What do you all think?)

For starters, I'll just be playing around and getting used to the T4i. Ultimately, I want to use it for some short films, documentaries, etc.

Thanks for any help!
 
The 40 mm and the 18-135 are both new lenses. They have STM focusing for video, which is silent when you use auto focus on the T4i.

The LCD touch screen has facial tracking too. You can touch a face on the LCD and the camera will keep the focus on that spot.

You can also use the touch screenn to "puul focus" by touching on another item on eth LCD. With teh STM lenses, the focus point moves a little more slowly and linerally, without hunting back and forth like on the older USM lenses.

I really like the T4i quite a bit.

I woul ddefinitely buy either the 40 or the 18-135 before other lenses because of the STM.

FWIW, I actually have an unused T4i camera, either the body only or body with the 18-135, that I am going to sell for less than what I paid. I bought it from Adorama with full US warranty, it is unused in the box. I already had a T4i, but I bought the kit to get the 18-135 lens and a few "extras" that I got with it, but then I just bought a 5D3.

Good luck! Let us know what you decide.

Best,
Michael
 
Thanks for the feedback, Michael. I'm really liking the sound of the STM focusing on these lenses. What are your opinions on the 55-135mm kit lens? Is it sufficient enough for shooting good video?

How about the 40mm - is that a good choice for a first step prime lens for my bag? Is it still decent enough on a crop censor?

Sorry for all the questions, but I'm ready and eager to drop some cash on getting started and want to make sure I do it right.

Thanks again and thanks to anyone else willing to chime in!
 
The 40 mm STM is really an excellent lens. It is a "Pancake", which means it is very small - flat. Some people like the older manual lenses because of their long focus throw, etc. But I am very eager to use auto focus with the T4i and the 40 mm is really a great all around lens.

The 18-135 has much better MTF (charts that show the sharpness) than the previous kit lenses. There have been somewhat different opinions on tests, but overall it is a very good lens, especially for the price (about $350 in the kit. The T4i sells for $850 for the body, $1,200 with the body and the 18-135. The 40 mm is $200.) The 18-135 IS is also optimized for hand held video - walking, etc.


I took some pictures to formally test the 18-135 against my other lenses, but I have not had a chance to look at them yet. Here is one review:

http://digital.photorecommendations.com/recs/2012/06/canon-ef-s-18-135mm-f3-5-5-6-is-stm-lens/


Some people really prefer prime lenses. I almost always wind up using my zooms.

The preferred L zooms for teh Canon, and for use on other cameras, are usually the 24-70 and the 70-200. The 24-105 is also used by a lot of people. The street price of those used are about $1,150; $1,250 to $1,950 (Versions I and II); and $800 new, in that order.

As I said, I have always had a full set of primes and zooms, but I go back to the zooms and use them almost all of the time.

I just bought a 24-105. I will probably use that and/or my 24-70 and 70-200 (haven't decided which to keep) for most critical work.

For every day work I intend to use the 18-135 with the auto focus. I have had a lot of fun working with the face tracking in good light. It really is a nice setup.

If I didn't have the funds, I wold probably go with the 18-135 first for everything. Then I would probably add the 40 mm as a really good quality lens for portraits, etc.

After that I would add some older manual focus primes, or a really good zoom. The focal lengths would depend on what you shoot the most, I usually like a bit of a wide, usually around a 35 mm on a full frame.

Do you need other things too? tripod, rig, recorder, mics? Do you have a total budget? That might determine where you wind up.

Do you also want to do still photo, or mostly just video?

If you can't afford the L glass, you might buy the 18-135 and the 40 mm, to cover almost everything. Then add an older Zeiss with an adapter, or something like that in 1 or 2 focal lengths, maybe a 24 and an 85 or a 100. Along with the 40, that would get you coverage of most of eth range with the zoom and with good quality primes.

Hopefully others will chime in! Maybe more in the morning.

Best,
Michael
 
brancasterr said:
I'm thinking I'll stick with the 18-55mm and just pick up a nice prime lens -- say 50mm F/1.8
Click to expand...

Forget the 18-135. Just start with the 18-55 and the 50 1.8. After a while you will decide where to upgrade. When I sold my 550d and 18-55 I got a 60d with a Tamron 17-50 2.8 non vc. If you don't want the 18-55 I would go for the Tamron because it's faster and constant aperture, but the 18-135 is not all you think it is.
 
Well shoot, I'm a bit torn at this point. Unadog, you've given me some solid advice. As for shooting stills - yes I'd like to do a bit of that. Probably more of it at first, then mostly video after that. As for other equipment, I've collected a few nice mics and field recorders throughout my college career, as well as some other essentials. So thankfully most of my budget can be allotted towards the camera.

Rockmore, what makes the 50mm better than the 40mm pancake other than speed? I was really leaning towards the 40mm because of the stepping motor. Also, what makes the 18-135mm inferior other than the non-constant aperture?

I was almost set on what I wanted after reading unadogs input and thinking some more, but you have me second guessing myself!
Thanks for your input.
 
You'll be fine with either the 50mm or the 40mm. The 50mm is faster, smaller and cheaper than the 40mm, and also sharper than lenses costing 10 times as much, but build quality is as bad as it gets, and bokeh... well, also the worst I've seen, or close to that. The 40mm on a full frame camera is just a match made in heaven: I've found this to be a nearly perfect walk-around-the-city bundle. Put a 5D3 with the 40mm inside a neoprene body-only bag, and you're packing a lot of heat in a tiny and confortable package. For APS-C, I'm not sure the 40mm is such a great fit: it's still small and sharp, but it becomes a moderately long lens, and for portraits on APS-C you may want shallower DoF than f/2.8 can get you. YMMV.
 
For an APS-sensor prime, I really prefer a 28mm 2.8. They're plentiful in manual-focus Nikon mount used. And the EOS can take Nikkor, Pentax, and many more lenses with adapters.

I was on a video shoot with a Dallas Cowboy and they wanted some stills - for 6' tall lobby standups. I'd been using Nikon glass for the video, but I put the kit lens on and shot some RAW stills with the video rig (T2i). At f5.6 they were really nice & sharp - it's not a bad lens. Focusing it manually just sucks though, tiny, loosey-goosey focus ring (on mine anyway).

If you're serious about "film making" vs. playing around, I'm guessing you won't have much use for AF (unless the T4i has somehow miraculously advanced for video AF). You can save a lot of $$ by getting cheap adapters and older manual focus lenses. I use a recent Nikkor AF 18-35 AF zoom a lot of the time. It's f3.5 at the wide end (and 4.5 zoomed) - but I rarely shoot 2.8 and I have primes for that. For planned & storyboarded shoots I tend to use a 28mm 2.8 and a 50mm 1.8 when I want to go longer. I have an old series E Nikkor 100mm 2.8 (consumer-ish lens) that is just so luscious I'm always looking for uses for it. That set of glass cost less than one current Nikon or Canon 2.8 zoom. (Though one of these days I'll get a Tamron wide 2.8 zoom and sell the Nikkor AF).

All of those lenses have shot broadcast spots that have run locally or nationally. There's a lot of nice glass out there.
 
Thanks a lot for all the feedback guys. I'm still flipping this all over in my head, but I think I'll go with the cheaper kit with the 18-55mm lens and also pick up the 40mm. I'm just worried about how long it will be on the crop censor. I think it'll be a bit better than the 50mm though. I'd like the 28mm, but I think it's a bit out of my price range at the moment.
 
ROCKMORE said:
but the 18-135 is not all you think it is.
Click to expand...


Just to note that this is a new 18-135 that has only hit the shelves within the past month. Is that the same lens that you are referring to?

The MTF's on this lens are much better than the previous.
 
Unadog, I was wondering the same thing! I've always heard to drear clear of kit lenses, but have heard some good things about that one across other boards and through some friends.
 
Michael Carter said:
I'm guessing you won't have much use for AF (unless the T4i has somehow miraculously advanced for video AF)
Click to expand...

Advanced compared to what? To any other Canon? YES, absolutely.

The T4i sensor has teh new Phase Detecton focusing on the sensor. It supports a number of continous video auto focus modes (Servo Auto Focus), which no other Canon camera had in the past, or has now. This is something that is also going to be implemented on the C100 with the STM lenses.

It also has a "face tracking" auto focus mode. You can select a focal point - a face or object - on the touch screen. It will then keep that face in focus as it moves across the screen, or toward the camera, etc.

It also works quite well for stationary objects in the frame as you recompose and move the camera. I used it to select a billboard that I wanted to keep in focus, for example, as the camera moved both away from it and diagonal to it.

It is useful both for traditional film making type techniques once you figure out how to use it in your kit, as well as for documentary situations, run & gun, and to extend the use of the T4i into areas where you would usually move to a camcorder. I know folks are used to manual focus and focus pulling. This is sort of like when Canon first introduced auto focus - I remember thinking taht it was cheating! :)

The 40 mm and 18-135 are the only two STM lenses that have silent stepping and a special focusing mode for video that "floats" smoothly and a little dreamily into sharp focus, rather than hunting or moving quickly.

I don't disageee with the Nikon, etc. good quality manual lenses for that work. I have Zeiss 28 mm and 35 mm, along with a 50 mm 1.8 and a Canon 90 mm TS-E (Tilt/Shift manual focus.) I just sold my Canon 85 mm 1.2 because I didn't use it.

But, yes - auto focus is a whole new tool on the T4i that I personally love and have adopted for all types of video work. I am pretty sure we will also see it show up on a more professional, video centric stills camera soon - something between the T4i and the 1D-C, like a 7D-C or a 3D-C.

Cheers! New tools - very happy!

Michael
 
brancasterr said:
Unadog, I was wondering the same thing! I've always heard to drear clear of kit lenses, but have heard some good things about that one across other boards and through some friends.
Click to expand...

This is the fisrt kit lens that I have used in about 20 years. Before I started to re-arrange lenses recently to make room for the STM, I had 7 L lenses, plus about 5 primes, but no non-L zooms ever.

I still have to compare it to my 24-70 L, which I use for stills about 85% of the time. I have pictures side-by-side upstairs on my editing computer, I will have a look later.


I don't want to oversell the 18-135! The good L zooms are definitely worth the money if you can afford it! (It actually holds it's value quite well, especially if you buy it used at a good price.)

But the STM gives me a whole new capability in my kit that I really love. You learn how to "dance" with any camera that you use based on it's features - like "focus and recompose" with the still image focus points. The same is true with using the continous auto focus, or the touch screen auto focus to "pull" a new focus point (lock focus on a near spot, start taping, touch the new focus spot and the camera will do teh "pull"). Lot's of fun!

Again, I don't want to sell all of this too strongly, especially the lens. But it seems to have mostly flwon under the radar. The auto focus came out around June 15. The 18-135 has only been available since around July 31/Aug 1.

Cheers!
Michael
 
I really like the idea of STM, but I'm not so sure I'd use the 18-135mm enough to justify spending the extra cash on it. I might just get the cheaper kit lens to toy around with and pick up the 40mm with the stepping motor until I can afford some better glass.

But I'm also debating on if I want the 40mm or the 50mm because the latter is faster and probably sharper (and not to mention on the T4i it might still be too long to do much with, please correct me if I'm wrong). But I'm not so sure about the mediocre bokeh stats that Samuel H mentioned.

I'd really like a 28mm, but I'll have to save for that. It's just a bit out of my reach.

Decisions, decisions.
 
Last edited:
We were talking specifically about lenses for the T4i, and abourt what was unique to that camera.

You might read the older threads in the Canon APS-C forum. A lot of folks have different views, and can clue you in to good, cheap sets of alternative lensses. Therre are all kinds of non-Canon manual lenses that folks use on the Canon's for filmaking. Yu might find someone dumping a whole set of manual focus if they are changing cameras, etc. if that is teh direction you are headed

You can pick Canon FD or Nikon manual or older Contax/Zeiss with adapters in the $100 to $200 range. A standard set is something like a 24, 28, 35, 50, 85. Maybe a 100 mm or a 135 mm.


For teh Canon auto focus lenses, I don't thibnk the 50 1.8 is sharper than the 40 mm. I have both of those lenses, only because the 50 1.8 is harly worth bothering to sell. I think the 40 mm is as good as the Canon 50 1.4. The 40 mm is a great lens, as all of Canon's new lenses have been - the 24 & 28 IS, the 24-70 II, the 70-200 II, etc. But it is not a manual focus lens, it is if you are going to be using auto focus.


http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/06/canon-40mm-pancake-how-did-they-do-that

You can see the average number is really excellent, which is especially surprising since pancakes often have poor corners. This is sooo not the case here that I’ll show you a graphed printout of a typical copy. Notice it retains excellent sharpness right out to the absolute corners on a 5D II.

The 40mm f/2.8 lens is near peak sharpness wide open. The graph below shows 8 copies I tested at both f/2.8 and f/5.6. There’s only a slight increase in sharpness (I’m not certain that difference would be visible in a photograph, it’s within 5 SQF points.)

​

It is fairly longish on the T4i. It is a very nice portrait lens. I use my 24-70 L 2.8 all of the time for portraits- I used to shoot fashion with that lens about 85% of the time - and I never wanted a wider aperature. In fact I recently sold my Canon 85 mm 1.2 because I never used it.

Go a bit slow. Try out if you get a chance. I can tell you my lens kit right now, and what I might do. But I am also a very serious still pghotographer (I used to have my own studio, closed it recently because of health.)

My zooms:
Canon 17-40 L 4.0, 24-70 L 2.8, 70-200 2.8 IS Version II, 70-200 4.0 non-IS, 24-105 4.0 (those are all L zooms. I use the 24-70 more than anything else. I will upgrade to the 24-70 II in a while. If I had to sell everything else I would keep teh 24-70 as my one lens.))​


My primes:
Canon 24 2.8, 50 1.8, 85 L 1.2, 45 mm TS-E, 90 mm TS-E (tilt/shift. Those 2 are both manual focus L lenses)

Zeiss 28 2.8, 35 2.0​


I just added the two STM lenses:
40 mm 2.8 STM, 18-135 mm STM​


And I sold these two:

45 mm TS-E (redundant to 40 mm pancake), 85 1.2 (redundant to 90 mm TS-E)​



Some people go wider with the Tokina 11-16. I have never needed a lens that wide (but I also have the 5D3 full frame.)

Personally, I do just fine with the Canon zooms and rarely go to teh primes or manual focus. The 24-105 in particular is a pretty good all around lens. It sell new now for about $800 - people pull them out of the body & lens kit and sell them for that. A used one might run around $725. There are a lot of Canon C300 folks who are using taht as their main lens.

Sleep on it for a few days. Borrow, or try pout a lens. See what you like. Look around for baragains on the manual primes if you want to try those oiut. I used to be obsessive about good primes, but since I got the 24-70 L zoom on my 1DsII around 2004, that has been my bread-and-butter, trusted lens for everything.

Sorry for all teh text and noise here.
Best,
Michael
 
Last edited:
Just got my daughter the 18-135 Canon, and must say it does quite well for itself. Personally IO wouldn't get tghe 18-55, as it just is not very durable, with a plastic lens mount and all. The Canon 18-135mm does seem to be built of much more substantial materials, so I would go for it. Of course it does cost a bit more but it seems to be money well spent.
 
As an owner of a T4i + 18-135mm STM kit, I'm obviously biased. But one thing I didn't see pointed out yet is that AF on the 50mm f1.8 II is really noisy, and manually pulling focus on this lens is a PITA.

And as an owner of a GH2 + 20mm f1.7 "pancake" lens, I'm obviously biased again. But I don't see the point of a "pancake" lens on the T4i, much less on a full frame body, much less once you add a cage and accessories for video.

My 2¢ - Mark
 
And on it goes...

I would like to emphasize 28mm for a nice sweet spot for small sensors... or even a 20mm for people that like to go a little Kubrick with their framing. There are plenty of Pentax, Nikon, Etc manual lenses at 2.8 out there. KEH.com is a great resource - I've gotten simply fantastic gear from them; the stuff they've rated "user" i would have called "near mint". One stop shopping. You just can't beat the focus damping of a manual lens. They feel so GOOD.

As for adapters - they work quite well (my experience is with Nikon). They're a little fiddly, I like to have several at a shoot to speed things up - they're cheap as hell too. Get EOS rear caps for them and you can work faster and pack quickly. I store the adapters in old plastic filter boxes (those round-disc-shaped transparent plastic "cans" that are the size of a mason jar top).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top