Rate these lenses for the 550D that I will be getting

Ironman

Ironman

Active member
Hi all

I am getting a 550D with a kit lens 18-55mm

- Canon EF 28-135mm

- Canon EF50mm f1.8

I have a small budget for further lenses, suggest me more please.
 
Canon EF50mm f1.8 is good, focus ring is a little thin and flimsy for video but its alright.. I think you ll barely use your 18-55mm
 
I'll honestly say at this point it's a matter of opinion. Having people rate your lenses will conflict. But the way I would answer is this way now due to conflict is as follows:

I would rate:
Quality of build
Quality of image
Usefullness of a focal range
Usefulness of an aperture range

Because some people go 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 Kit lens .....great lens
And I'll go not really.
And they'll go well great movies are made with anything, it's just the skill of the filmmaker.
And I'll go I know I know but technically speaking this lens is not that great.
Then someone will say well you can barely tell the difference between L-Glass and a kit lens because the image gets softer on the H264 anyway.
Blah blah blah



So I think it would be better to rate it as I mentioned above do avoid all this. Ha.
 
I'd avoid that 28-135.
For my kit I got a sigma 24-70 2.8 that did alot of heavy lifting on a doc I shot. Also a 70-200 F4 L series, which was nice...but I ended up not using it so much.

Get a Nikon 50mm 1.4 for cheap ($125 or so) and a $15 adapter. I had the Canon 50mm 1.8 and the focus ring is far too small. If you think you ever want to get a follow focus, you should avoid this lens. Its nice, but all made of plastic. You can get some nice old Nikkors for good prices on ebay.

I also picked up a nice Mir 35mm F2 for $150 that I love, and my Helios 40-1 is pretty much worth its weight in gold.
 
My 7D came with the 28-135mm. I sold it. It was great for getting great family snapshots.

Although I had seen great images come out of the $99 1.8 50mm, I bought the 1.4. It's my favorite lens. Just the right amount of telephoto on the 7D and the price was right.

Then I began renting prime lenses for my video work. I really like the Sigma 30mm and the Canon 22mm 2.8. They were a great fit for a small office we were shooting in.

I also have the Tokina 11-16 for when I need an establishing shot or something wide. It's 2.8 all the way through, unlike the 28-135mm.

Check out prolost.com if you've got an ipad. Stu has an app that helps you pick lenses for your camera back.
 
This is why it's better to try out the lenses if you can. I had the 28-135, and I enjoyed this lens, it was big, and heavy, and at times the weight of the front glass could make the lens telescope just by pointing it down. But on a posative note, it worked well for video. It's not as sharp as the 50 1.8, and has some barell distortion at it's widest, but it was still a decent lens and it had the IS with fairly quick auto focusing. It's not L series, but it can be had for a couple hundred bucks if you look hard enough.

The 50mm 1.8 is a complete piece of garbage. It is by far the worst build quality of any lens I have ever seen. BUT!, it has wonderful optics, and is tack sharp. JUST BE CAREFUL WITH IT. One drop from only a couple feet will make this lens pretty much explode into a bunch of pieces. Get the insurance with this lens.
 
What are you using it for and what's your total budget?

Are you already getting the 50 f1.8 and the 28-135? Or those among the lenses you're considering?
 
I sold the kit lens with my T2i and bought a Sigma DC 17-50 2.8 which I like a lot, and also have the cheap 50mm 1.8 which I seem to never remember to shoot with anymore. In retrospect I should have just bought the body. For full frame, 28mm is not quite wide enough you might find. It's good, but you might find that you really lack a truly wide angle. I shot in 35mm for years with 28, but also had a 17mm (or was it 18?)

I also added the 70-200 but that was lot of money. But it's a great lens. And I added a Canon prime macro lens at 80mm, which I sometimes use for portraits. I do miss something that effectively covers 50 to 125 (speaking in full frame terms here as the 70-200 is a huge lens to haul out for some shots), and find myself occasionally wishing for something wider than 17, but back to steventimothy's question, "what are you wanting to do, and what's your budget?" For example, I am a person who tends towards wide angle, and was taught, 'get close, then closer' by my original mentor. So investing in teles doesn't really thrill me, but it's a tool for the toolbox. It might be worthwhile to really understand what you need, buy and sell some lenses as you find they don't quite work, and save up for real top notch glass, used or not. Good luck and go shoot a lot, you'll find out quickly what suits your needs!
 
Start with just the 18-55IS and 50/1.8, and hold off on getting anything else until you've had a chance to shoot a fair bit with both. You'll have a much better idea of whether you want faster, longer, wider etc.
 
Okay guys, I've been away and researched. I concluded to get the following:

[FONT=&quot]Canon EF 28mm f2.8
[/FONT] Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II Lens
[FONT=&quot]Canon EF-S 55-250mm

BTW, my 550D will arrive in few hours... can't wait :)
[/FONT]
 
For most primes, go cheaper and get some old M42 lenses and a $3 adapter on ebay. I have a 28, 50, 85 and 135 M42 and they work amazingly (all 2.8)... Definitely avoid the 28-135. I have heard a lot of good things about the 17-55 2.8
 
andythefilmer said:
For most primes, go cheaper and get some old M42 lenses and a $3 adapter on ebay. I have a 28, 50, 85 and 135 M42 and they work amazingly (all 2.8)... Definitely avoid the 28-135. I have heard a lot of good things about the 17-55 2.8
Click to expand...

I don't have any experience with the M42 lenses, but I agree with the spirit and intent of the comment. To the OP I have to ask what are you wanting to get out of your T2i, and what do you think that your next camera is going to be? I have a T2i and when I started buying lenses I knew that I wanted to spend money on glass the I could use on possible future cameras, as I knew that the T2i would not be my last camera. What I went with is a set of manual Nikon prime lenses, mostly older pre-AI lenses. I am so glade that I did because I am most likely going to be getting a FS100 when it comes out, and because I have a set of Nikon prime lenses, when I get this camera I am going to hit the ground running with a pretty bad ass set of lenses, that will work on that camera with the use of very cheap mechanical adaptors. If you get a set of Canon electronically controlled lenses for your T2i now, there is no guarantee that those lenses will work with your next camera, at least without the cost of expensive electronic compatible adaptors. Again, I suggest getting manual Nikon prime lenses. The Nikon F-mount is the most produced lens in history and because of its design is adaptable to most of the camera lens mounts we are likely to see for the foreseeable future. Of course, if you see no problem with the possibility of buying a whole new set of lenses for your next camera, then this is mute point and your list of Canon lenses should be fine for you now.
 
Last edited:
andythefilmer said:
For most primes, go cheaper and get some old M42 lenses and a $3 adapter on ebay. I have a 28, 50, 85 and 135 M42 and they work amazingly (all 2.8)... Definitely avoid the 28-135. I have heard a lot of good things about the 17-55 2.8
Click to expand...

That's good advice if you don't shoot many stills, & just do filmmaking. I crossover for documentary a lot, and often need autofocus on assigment. But a bag of primes is a good investment.
 
* zooms with a lot of range usually are not very good (slow and soft)

* I have the canon 50mm f/1.8; I bought a $3 uv filter from ebay, busted the glass so I'd just have the ring, screwed it in front of the lens, covered it with a couple of layers of tape until it was level with the focusing ring, then put my followfocus gears in between the focusing ring and the empty filter; it worked, but it's not worth the effort: the lens is just not good enough: it's ultra-sharp, but has too much contrast for my taste, and the bokeh is absolutely horrible, which leads me to...

* +1 for cheap vintage lenses; I use a carl zeiss jena pancolar 50mm f/1.8 with M42 mount, and it is worlds better than the canon 50mm f/1.8 (read: this one has lovely bokeh, whereas with the canon you have to be very careful with what you have in the background of your images, because it may look truly horrible); a leitz summicron-R 50mm f/1.8 or summilux-R 50mm f/1.4 would be even better than the pancolar; my main general-purpose lens is a leitz elmarit-R 35mm f/2.8 (mor expensive than the others, but 50mm is too telephoto for a general purpose lens on APS-C)
 
Ironman said:
Okay guys, I've been away and researched. I concluded to get the following:

[FONT=&quot]Canon EF 28mm f2.8
[/FONT] Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II Lens
[FONT=&quot]Canon EF-S 55-250mm

BTW, my 550D will arrive in few hours... can't wait :)
[/FONT]
Click to expand...

I would change the 28mm f/2.8 for the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. You'll get the same fast aperture, plus a wider range of focal lengths (including a wide-angle lens). The only thing you'll lose is a tiny bit of sharpness (perhaps imperceptible in video mode) and the ability to use it if you upgrade it to a Full Frame camera.

If your widest lens is 28mm you'll find yourself struggling in many situations. The FOV will be narrower than most videocameras, which are generally quite narrow even at the short end.

The 55-250 should be good outdoors, but if you plan on using it indoors you'd be better of saving and picking up something faster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top