ONE lens to buy

[PerroneFord]

As for changing F-stop when you zoom with a variable f-stop lens (like the 18-135 f3.5 - 5.6), you just have to know NOT TO ZOOM during a shot or only zoom a little and you will be fine. If you're planning on zooming then shooting video on a DSLR is not for you, because even pricey fixed iris telephotos for stills cameras are NOT parfocal, so you will be out of focus when you finish zooming. Get a dedicated video camera if you want to zoom a lot.

Clearly you don't understand what I said. I am not talking about zooming while recording. I am talking about setting up lighting for a shot, shooting the two shot, adjusting the camera, and shooting the close-up. I'd "prefer" to not have to adjust my lighting intensity simply because I want to go for 24mm to 85mm on my nice zoom lens.

You realistically have to think about the practical nature of these lens and what you're planning on doing with them. A zoom like the 18-135 IS is lightweight, has great optics, is practical handheld, is reasonably fast, is new with a guarantee, and costs next to nothing. Fixed primes have better optics and are usually faster, but they are heavy, hard to focus without a finder, not practical at all for stills, require constant changing risking sensor damage, etc.

Wow. Ok. You just slammed practically every non-film feature on every continent made in the past 10 years.

If you want a manual lens for practice, just switch the AF button to "off"; at least you have the option

Changing an AF lens to MF doesn't feel ANYTHING like using a good MF lens. The experience is totally different.

You could make a very nice film with the two lenses I mentioned, if you find you like it and have talent, then you could start to look at primes.

True. And often what I suggest to new shooters. Those of us who grew up with MF lenses (hell I was nearly OUT of the pro-stills game before AF was available) probably feel differently.

 

[steventimothy]

Wow. Ok. You just slammed practically every non-film feature on every continent made in the past 10 years.

And the lion's share of those films had a specific guy just to focus the camera

I'm not knocking primes; I like them a lot! But the original poster said he had a budget of around $550 for lenses. So I assume that means he's not planning on buying a finder or a portable LCD. You're a better man than I if you can focus properly with the in-built LCD. Also, I get a lot of jitter and jello without IS, handheld; maybe I drink too much coffee.

If the OP is a serious filmmaker and is only planning on shooting short or long (staged) films, only on a tripod, then primes can be fine, with a finder and/or portable lcd. But if he's going to shoot photos, or do documentary work, for example, he might want to have an AF/IS, flexible zoom lens first.

 

[_JD_]

24-70l

 

[AGMedia]

With over a decade of pro photography experience -- I don't disagree with much in these responses. Personally, I live by primes, and I've got a glass collection that goes back nearly forty years.

That being said -- if the "OP" is on a strict budget to equip a T2i -- I'd come in with a totally, totally different recommendation.

For stills, even pro stills, autofocus matters. This is different from the purist "film maker" world. Secondly, vintage stuff on a T2i introduces issues that you need some degree of experience in order to correct/compensate.

Accordingly, my recommendation comes in at about three hundred dollars, and will leave you VASTLY better off than with a "kit" lens.

First -- the "nifty fifty" -- the $99 Canon 50 f/1.8 prime lens. In the entire world of new lenses, this may be the best bargain. Second -- the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8-4.5 "DC OS HSM." $199 at B&H, this may be the second best bargain in the new lens world.

Basically, the above gives you lower light and shallow focus capabilities (the nifty fifty), along with a useful zoom range lens (28-80mm equivalent on your T2i) with optical stabilization that multiple sources confirm works well and that multiple sources confirm is better than the Canon 18-55 kit lens in terms of a number of things including sharpness and speed.

Now -- are you going to get better results with a legendary thirty year old prime? Of course. But the above option will work with all the features on your T2i -- offers you more options than just one lens -- and comes in two hundred dollars under your proposed budget.

Good luck!

 

[jambredz]

welll shucks..if he went that route he'd still have $200 for a vintage prime...just for kicks (and variation). Best of both worlds

 

[afcurry]

I personally follow Chris Watsons tips and went the vintage lens route as well. I must agree with others and say that manual focus can be tricky and does require a great deal of skill to use...but I like it because I like a challenge and the quality of some of these vintage lenses are incredible. I've got the Helios 44-2 58mm 2.0 and a super takumar 50mm 1.4. Love them so far, need more though!

Quite tricky when taking stills though especially without any focus assist...does anyone have good input on this factor, pulling focus is so damn hard with these lenses!

 

[Chris Watson]

You can actually get focus confirm adapters that will beep when you are in focus. I've heard they work rather well for stills work. In video, I find the vintage lenses are way better for pulling focus than their AF counterparts. The focus rings are practically made for us. What also helps is the image magnification button on the camera that acts as a focus assist. It's invaluable.

 

[PerroneFord]

I'm sorry, but I am sure the old timers here are just laughing. Those of us who started shooting pre-autofocus are SO used to it, that we often just prefer manual focus. When you get your hands on a good MF lens (not an AF in MF mode), you understand. The lenses were made so that you could track a subject with subtlety. A small movement of the lens manifested itself in a small movement of focus. Unlike these AF lenses where a small movement translates into 10ft!

Those who wonder how in the heck we ever got sharp focus back then might be surprised to know that our optical viewfinders were MUCH larger than modern cameras. We also had split prism focusing glass that only came sharp when we were in focus. It really made things a ton easier. AF bodies are now expected to work with AF. So there is nothing there to help you.

So you have to practice. Just like we did. Fortunately, you can practice without the expense, time, and trouble of film development.

I would strongly recommend everyone buy at least ONE piece of vintage glass and an adapter to use it. If for no other reason as to remind yourself what photography used to be about. Before we let cameras dictate to us. When I put my non AI Nikon lens, on my Nikon film body camera, it doesn't know there's a lens attached. Literally. It won't even meter. The camera becomes the equivalent of a very nice pinhole camera with a shutter. Damn it's nice to shoot that way sometimes!

 

[kostas]

You can actually get focus confirm adapters that will beep when you are in focus. I've heard they work rather well for stills work.

These adapters work quite good for stills. Of course compared to a USM Autofocus lens, you need 10-20 x more time to get your shot in focus, but if you do you can obtain some astonishing quality pictures. However, for video I have noticed that with a focus confirm adapter there is some exposure flickering (probably due to the electronic contacts) so these may not be ideal for video.

I really like vintage lenses, seems like each lens has it's own character and you can get great things right out of the glass (with no additional work in post). In fact I have been spending too much in vintage lenses recently, this is just addictive. I don't even have storage space anymore . However for run and gun stuff (especially stills) you need an autofocus walkaround lens too on your bag IMHO. A great all around kit lens upgrade for cropped sensor bodies is the Canon 15-85 f3.5-5.6 IS USM (24mm-135mm coverage). This, combined with some fast vintage glass (primes for lowlight etc) gives you a complete set of excellent quality lenses both for stills and for video.

In my opinion you need a good zoom with autofocus and enough reach (not necessarily the fastest one) and a couple of fast primes: Super takumar 35 f 2, Super Takumar 50 1.4, Rokinon 85 1.4, just to mention some (you don't need to have them all though if you can move around for shooting).
It is not just one lens, you can get away with two.

But if you can afford just one, it should be a zoom with an upgrade plan for the future...

 

[Ben_B]

For $500 get a few different fast old Nikon primes.

Nikkor 50mm f/1.4, about $80.
Nikon AIS 24mm f/2.8, about $200-250
Nikkor 85mm f/2.0, about $150
Nikkor 105mm f/2.5, about $80.
Nikon F-mount to Canon EF adaptor, about $30.

 

[Jordan Scott Price]

Those who wonder how in the heck we ever got sharp focus back then might be surprised to know that our optical viewfinders were MUCH larger than modern cameras. We also had split prism focusing glass that only came sharp when we were in focus. It really made things a ton easier. AF bodies are now expected to work with AF. So there is nothing there to help you.

I was taught on split prism glass.

One of the most ingenious designs of modern photography, IMO.

I really like vintage lenses, seems like each lens has it's own character and you can get great things right out of the glass (with no additional work in post). In fact I have been spending too much in vintage lenses recently, this is just addictive. I don't even have storage space anymore

You aren't alone.

 

[PerroneFord]

For $500 get a few different fast old Nikon primes.

Nikkor 50mm f/1.4, about $80.
Nikon AIS 24mm f/2.8, about $200-250
Nikkor 85mm f/2.0, about $150
Nikkor 105mm f/2.5, about $80.
Nikon F-mount to Canon EF adaptor, about $30.

I haven't seen an Nikon 50mm 1.4 for for less than $100 in a month unless it's the older non-AI version. Typical prices seem to be $99-130 for the different variants.

The 105/2.5s seem to be going around $120+ for nice ones.

On the good side, I'm paying $15.99 for my Kawa F-Mount to EF mount adapters. Work great.

 

[Ben_B]

No reason not to get Non AI really. The optical quality is pretty much the same. I've seen good condition 105/2.5 on Adorama for $80. It was in the top 3/4rds of their condition gauge.

 

[Ben_B]

I'm sorry, but I am sure the old timers here are just laughing. Those of us who started shooting pre-autofocus are SO used to it, that we often just prefer manual focus. When you get your hands on a good MF lens (not an AF in MF mode), you understand. The lenses were made so that you could track a subject with subtlety. A small movement of the lens manifested itself in a small movement of focus. Unlike these AF lenses where a small movement translates into 10ft!

Those who wonder how in the heck we ever got sharp focus back then might be surprised to know that our optical viewfinders were MUCH larger than modern cameras. We also had split prism focusing glass that only came sharp when we were in focus. It really made things a ton easier. AF bodies are now expected to work with AF. So there is nothing there to help you.

Damn straight. My Nikon FM2 cameras have huge viewfinders and split prism. Great stuff.

 

[PerroneFord]

No reason not to get Non AI really. The optical quality is pretty much the same. I've seen good condition 105/2.5 on Adorama for $80. It was in the top 3/4rds of their condition gauge.

Oh I have a very good reason. My Nikon film body is dumb as a post with non-AI glass. So if I get it, it's basically an EOS only purchase for me, whereas if I get an AI lens, I can meter with the film camera.

Probably doesn't apply to many others, but for those with bodies from more than one manufacturer, it's important maybe.

 

[Ben_B]

Oh I have a very good reason. My Nikon film body is dumb as a post with non-AI glass. So if I get it, it's basically an EOS only purchase for me, whereas if I get an AI lens, I can meter with the film camera.

Probably doesn't apply to many others, but for those with bodies from more than one manufacturer, it's important maybe.

Similar logic applies to me when buying lenses for my Nikon film cameras and my Gh1...although my Nikons are full manual film cameras so i can always just do stop down metering with the DOF preview button...still somewhat inconvenient.

 

[mrchirster]

I'm in the same position ... which lens to buy with my new camera?
I was planning on getting the t2i because i dont have a lot of money to spend, now hat the 60D is coming out I want to wait for it.
I still havent decided on a lens though...
so the consensus seems to be:

1. go with an all purpose lens: Tamron 17-50 if you are on a budget or else the canon if you have money. but you will have a max of f2.8 which could be too slow for some lowllight stuff. but a lot of them have optical compensation so they are good for handheld stuff

2. go get a vintage lens, you can afford more lenses and still have amazing picture quality

3. go with modern primes. they are more expansive and less flexible then a zoom lens, but they'll provide the best sharpness and have features like AF


does that some up the recommendations so far? I'm still lost with this and i consider a 30mm lens as a good start so far...

I have a vintage lens, a yashinon 50mm 1.7 which has a beautiful bokeh. it is not very sharp though and i like to be more flexible... i wish there would be a lens like a 17-50mm 1.8 for 500$

 

[PerroneFord]

I'm in the same position ... which lens to buy with my new camera?
I was planning on getting the t2i because i dont have a lot of money to spend, now hat the 60D is coming out I want to wait for it.
I still havent decided on a lens though...
so the consensus seems to be:

"a lens".

1. go with an all purpose lens: Tamron 17-50 if you are on a budget or else the canon if you have money. but you will have a max of f2.8 which could be too slow for some lowllight stuff. but a lot of them have optical compensation so they are good for handheld stuff

I've sen the optical compensation. For handheld work it's nearly useless. If you're on a stabilizer or a dolly, might be ok. I certainly wouldn't pay a premium for it.

2. go get a vintage lens, you can afford more lenses and still have amazing picture quality

No, not a vintage lens. A SET of vintage lenses. There is not point buying an interchangeable lens camera, and then saddling it with a fixed lens.

3. go with modern primes. they are more expansive and less flexible then a zoom lens, but they'll provide the best sharpness and have features like AF

I couldn't even fathom doing this. They are all razor sharp, and produce aliasing out the wazoo... You spend a boatload on the glass, and then more money for softening filters so your camera doesn't moire up on every pattern it sees.

does that some up the recommendations so far? I'm still lost with this and i consider a 30mm lens as a good start so far...

A 35mm is a decent start, but kinda pricey if you buy a fast one.

I have a vintage lens, a yashinon 50mm 1.7 which has a beautiful bokeh. it is not very sharp though and i like to be more flexible... i wish there would be a lens like a 17-50mm 1.8 for 500$

Is that the DX? That's a nice lens. It's sharp enough. None of these lenses is going to be super sharp wide open unless you go for something a lot more expensive, like a Macro lens. Most of the Pentax Takumars are sharp so I am building a set of those. And a set of Nikon primes. And I'll add a few pieces of rogue glass here and there for special uses, like when I want wicked flare.

 

[Terry Lee]

Well there are some things to understand about sensors before choosing a lens for you T2i. The T2i is of course a croped 1.6 sensor.

Read Philip Bloom's blog post on "which lenses to buy" http://philipbloom.net/2010/08/20/which-lenses-to-buy/

Philip is an expert in the DSLR realm and has substantial experience with various equipment most of us haven't touched or knew was out there.

My personal choice after reading Philip's blog was the Tokina 11-16mm 2.8

Cheers.

 

[PerroneFord]

I don't think Phillip has much experience with older glass (I could be wrong). But certainly he knows the new AF stuff quite well.