Recommendations for budget glass?

M. Gilden

M. Gilden

Canon DSLR Moderator
I'm new to the DSLR world, and I'm currently borrowing a buddy's T2i with a 18-135 EFS Canon lens to play around with... it seems to work pretty well, but I've never used anything else to compare it to honestly.

I'm about to puchase a t2i of my own (LOVE this little camera, and now that Magic Lantern is out, I'm sold!), but I'm not sure what to do about lenses other than knowing I DON'T want the stock lens kit!

I spoke to a buddy of mine who works at B&H, and he is recommending the most bang for my buck with Nikon glass on an adapter- more specifically, lenses like this one:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/800740520-USE/Nikon_Normal_50mm_f_1_8_AIS.html

or

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/800742795-USE/Nikon_Wide_Angle_28mm_f_2_8.html

Honestly, this is my first SLR so I have no brand preference one way or the other, but I'm not sure if he is recommending something that will be more trouble than it is worth to me.

I know I'll lose autofocus and IS, but the guy told me the cameras don't autofocus during recording anyway, and if I'm doing mostly tripod mounted shoots the IS shouldn't matter either. I don't know, what do you guys think?

I'm not sure if this guy knows video as much as he does still shooters, so I'd like to ask the DVX community for their input here as well.
 
Do a thread search, this is such a common question and there are a million threads on great beginning lenses for people who are on a budget.

I agree with the Nikon glass, you'll find some great stuff here and there in the vintage section of things. The links you posted are for some ok ones, but the 2.8 is pretty slow and crappy. Try to buy faster lenses. With those old Nikons you can find 1.8, 1.4 even 1.2 and they'll be cheaper than a Canon 1.4. Not as sharp but pretty good. You say you'll be shooting tripod stuff but even if you don't the most important thing if you don't have IS is a shoulder mount for your camera.

Make sure if you get Nikon glass that it is compatible with the adapter and camera. There are some cheap lenses out there for Nikon that are actually built better than lenses of today with the exception of the lens coatings. Do a thread search "Vintage Glass" as someone posted some great vintage lenses to use with current DSLRs.

If I were you I'd start with a good "Standard" lens. I highly recommend Canon 28mm 1.8. This is a great lens to have, sharp and fast. Not super cheap like the Nikon glass but great. Also I'd recommend as a cheap standard lens Nikon Auto 35mm 2.0 and last Sigma 30mm 1.4.
 
For budget, without question, Sigma 30/1.4
Bokeh is fantastic, lowlight, close-up shots are magical.....
I've been hit/miss with wide shots on it but better to get a wide-angle for that anyway.
Some like the nifty 50 and that is great for the money too but i would go with the Sigma 30 over that.

Wideangle, most people would say Tokina 11-16. I tried it but it seemed to be a soft copy.

Zoom: 70-200/f4 is the best bang4buck. But i would get the IS version. Makes a big difference for video unless you never will use it for handheld.

I believe you can spend on a budget and it can be a total waste of money where you will be upgrading and selling later anyway.
Like you said, kit/stock lenses..forget about those. Don't go 'too cheap'. Find the best bang4buck.
The other option you have is looking at a GH2 which will actually have more options for 'cheaper' lenses with high quality.
 
I use vintage lenses from carl zeiss jena and leitz (leica)
they are cheap: around $100 for a czj pancolar 50mm f/1.8 or a leitz elmarit-r 90mm f/2.8, $400 for an amazing leitz elmarit-r 35mm f/2.8
they deliver great images, are very well built, and have a very nice long-throw focus ring (which, unlike on nikon glass, rotates in the same direction as any other brand)

I got mine from ebay, but it's a risky place to buy this kind of stuff, all of them have some minor flaws; if I had to buy again, I'd go for a specialty shop (like leicashop.com in europe)
 
With the exception of two lenses, every lens I own is Vintage, a.k.a. Budget Friendly and I own a bag full and then some.:) The two modern lenses I have owned are the Tokina 11-16, about $600 and the Rokinon 85mm 1.4, about $250.

If you want to go down the Vintage lens road, you really need to educate yourself, which I'm sure is why you made your post here. Well the great news is that many DSLR shooters have already gone down this road and we can benefit from their many hours of research as well as trial and error.

There are thousands and thousands of vintage lenses in the market and most Vintage 35mm SLR lenses can be adapted to Canon EOS. Two big exceptions are the Minolta and Canon FD mounts. Adapters can be found for as little as $5-15, depending on which mount.

When I was first researching Vintage Glass, Chris Watson helped me out a lot. He wrote a great in-depth article on Vintage Glass. After you read his article you will be well on your way to making better informed purchases.
http://www.eventdv.net/Articles/News/Feature/Vintage-Lenses-in-the-DSLR-Age-68120.htm

Since most of my lenses are Vintage, I do not own a lens with IS. Sure, IS would be nice, but with good technique, you can get away with non IS lenses. I looked at the links to B&H. The 50mm is a bit high for being an E series and only 1.8. You can find better and faster on Ebay for less money. The advantage with going with B&H or any physical brick and mortar business is that you can actually see the lens. Ebay has great prices, but they also have a lot of junk. A lot of sellers that don't know what to look for in describing the flaws in a lens, so remember with Ebay, buyer beware.

An in between option to B&H and Ebay is www.KEH.com. Their prices are usually better than B&H and they know their stuff.

I have bought some great deals on Ebay and I have bought some junk. Some of the deals...
Vivitar Series 1 70-210 f/3.5 for $70.
Vivitar Series 1 28-105 f/2.8-3.8 for $75.
Mir 24 35mm f/2.0 $85.
Helios 44 58mm f/2.0 $30

If all of that was not enough to think about, you also need to consider Zoom vs. Prime. Zooms are nice and more convienent, but they are limited to f/2.8. If you are shooting in low light, f/2.8 may not be fast enough. That's when fast primes may serve you better. With fast primes you also have the option for more dramatic bokeh.

If you want to see some edits from Vintage Glass, I have several samples on my Vimeo page.
 
draven4 said:
Do a thread search, this is such a common question and there are a million threads on great beginning lenses for people who are on a budget.
Click to expand...

I know, but the problem is that there are SO many varying opinions, its hard to determine what I really want. That's why I wanted to share the B&H guy's recommendation and get a second opinion from you guys.

I see a lot of people recommending the 50mm prime ("nifty/thrifty fifty").
I have very limited experience using a DSLR, and so far I've only tried with a 17-135mm zoom lens. I've gotten the hang of zooming/focusing, but I have no idea how a prime works.
As I understand it, "prime" means it will only focus at the fixed length listed from the lens. Does that mean I will be limited on where I place my camera? Do I need to move the camera back/forward from my subject to reach a focus-able point?
Do primes prohibit zooming entirely?

sorry for all the n00bish questions. I'm fascinated by this and want to learn!
What does that mean and how is it different than a telephoto/zoom lenses with a range?
 
That's one of the good and bad things about opinions...everyone has one :happy:

If you want to shoot stills the nifty fifty does give auto focus, but for video work I prefer a Vintage Nikon 50mm 1.4 or just about any other vintage 50mm 1.4. Not only do you get a faster lens, but you get a lens that was designed to manually focus for about the same price as the nifty fifty...but that's just my opinion.

Prime lenses do not zoom. They are fixed at one range of view, so if you want a wider shot, you have to physically move back. So it does get more expensive to go the prime route because you may need to consider a 16mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, and maybe even 85mm to cover the range that one zoom lens covers. But as I mentioned before, primes can be faster f/1.2 to f/2.0 where zooms are limited to f/2.8. The smaller the number, the wider the aperture, thus letting in more light. Faster lenses are also more expensive than the same brand and mm range of a slower lens.

Low light sensativity is a big plus for me because a lot of my shooting is in lower light. If my video camera had the ability to upgrade the lens to make it more light sensative, I would have loved that feature, but it doesn't exist in the fixed lens video camera world. The very thought that for a few hundred dollars I can make my camera become more light sensative is very appealling.

Primes have a wide range of focus, so depending on the lens, you can focus from a foot to infinity, but if you want the shot to be wider, you have to physically move the camera back. If you want the shot to be tighter, you have to physically move the camera closer.

You already know how a zoom works with your experimentation and as long as you have enough light, the zooms are easier to shoot with.
 
Mark Von Lanken said:
That's one of the good and bad things about opinions...everyone has one :happy:

If you want to shoot stills the nifty fifty does give auto focus, but for video work I prefer a Vintage Nikon 50mm 1.4 or just about any other vintage 50mm 1.4. Not only do you get a faster lens, but you get a lens that was designed to manually focus for about the same price as the nifty fifty...but that's just my opinion.

Prime lenses do not zoom. They are fixed at one range of view, so if you want a wider shot, you have to physically move back. So it does get more expensive to go the prime route because you may need to consider a 16mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, and maybe even 85mm to cover the range that one zoom lens covers. But as I mentioned before, primes can be faster f/1.2 to f/2.0 where zooms are limited to f/2.8. The smaller the number, the wider the aperture, thus letting in more light. Faster lenses are also more expensive than the same brand and mm range of a slower lens.

Low light sensativity is a big plus for me because a lot of my shooting is in lower light. If my video camera had the ability to upgrade the lens to make it more light sensative, I would have loved that feature, but it doesn't exist in the fixed lens video camera world. The very thought that for a few hundred dollars I can make my camera become more light sensative is very appealling.

Primes have a wide range of focus, so depending on the lens, you can focus from a foot to infinity, but if you want the shot to be wider, you have to physically move the camera back. If you want the shot to be tighter, you have to physically move the camera closer.

You already know how a zoom works with your experimentation and as long as you have enough light, the zooms are easier to shoot with.
Click to expand...

Thank you- this was the single most informative and helpful response I've ever gotten!
 
Nifty fifty was the first prime I owned when I bought the 7d. I do not recommend it. It will give you great image quality but

1. cheap build
2. too telephoto
3. not usable for many situations because of the telephoto (I know it's the same reason as 2 but I must stress this)

Like I said earlier the Sigma 30mm 1.4 or the Canon 28 1.8. Thing about the canon 28 is that it is compatible with full frame too if you ever go that route, Sigma is not. So in effect the Canon has more resale value. If canon comes out with a cheaper full frame for example a future 5d at a 7d price (whatever they will call it) then I'm buying, but not coming along with me will be my Sigma 30mm and the Tokina 11-16mm because they are only crop sensor lenses. Something to think about. Do research on this.

A great set of lenses will outlast many cameras and you will get more bang for your buck.
 
Last edited:
@ dishe
Thank you- this was the single most informative and helpful response I've ever gotten!
Click to expand...

Ha, dude we all gave you answers, if you didn't get enough info you need to dig the threads more. Judging by the thread question I gathered that you didn't take the time to search through these forums and look for the information that has already been presented in so many threads about this topic. It's okay man, here I'll help you.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?201760-The-Vintage-Lens-Thread&highlight=vintage+lenses
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?230481-Your-Choices-for-3-Lenses&highlight=vintage+lenses
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...lens-option&highlight=which+lenses+to+buy+new
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...eature-film&highlight=which+lenses+to+buy+new
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...Prime-Lens.&highlight=which+lenses+to+buy+new
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...Lens-Thread&highlight=which+lenses+to+buy+new
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...-party-lens&highlight=which+lenses+to+buy+new
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...gdet-lenses&highlight=which+lenses+to+buy+new
 
Last edited:
I have been picking up vintage manual focus Nikkor (Nikon) lenses and love them. The are wonderful quality and relatively inexpensive. I have a 20mm f2.8 AI-S lens, a 24mm F2.8 pre-AI, a 35mm f2.8 pre-AI, a 50mm f1.4 pre-AI (Fantastic lens), a 100mm f2.8 E series lens (Surprisingly very good quality) and a 200mm F3.5 "Q" pre-AI lens "Q" (It is very old and kind of soft for my tastes) . I paid under $200 for all of them except the 20mm which cost me $350ish. I have been picking them up off of eBay and so far have been very lucky to get good quality, low cost lenses. I want to pick up an 85mm f1.8 pre-AI lens to round out my selection of the lenses. The Nikkor lens work great with very inexpensive (re: CHEAP) Nikon F mount to EOS adaptors. I really like these lenses. I have the Nifty Fifty also, but do not care for it much. I way prefer the Nikkor 50mm f1.4 manual lens. That is a great lens.
 
draven4 said:
@ dishe

Ha, dude we all gave you answers, if you didn't get enough info you need to dig the threads more. Judging by the thread question I gathered that you didn't take the time to search through these forums and look for the information that has already been presented in so many threads about this topic. It's okay man, here I'll help you.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?201760-The-Vintage-Lens-Thread&highlight=vintage+lenses
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?230481-Your-Choices-for-3-Lenses&highlight=vintage+lenses
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...lens-option&highlight=which+lenses+to+buy+new
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...eature-film&highlight=which+lenses+to+buy+new
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...Prime-Lens.&highlight=which+lenses+to+buy+new
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...Lens-Thread&highlight=which+lenses+to+buy+new
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...-party-lens&highlight=which+lenses+to+buy+new
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...gdet-lenses&highlight=which+lenses+to+buy+new
Click to expand...

LOL, draven4, I apologize... I didn't mean to imply that everyone else's answer wasn't helpful!
I really appreciate the community here and all the selfless work and time everyone contributes!

The thing is, I've been reading and reading on this forum already, and I've seen many of the threads you pasted (in fact I think I may have even posted in some of them). There are so many opinions one way or another, that its hard to understand what makes one glass better to someone than another.
What I liked about Mark's response is that instead of just quoting other threads or dropping a brand name, he actually explained (for the first time to me on this forum) exactly what the difference is between a prime and zoom lens. I didn't even realize that I didn't know that.

As I wrote in the first post here, my only experience with an SLR was using a Canon 17-135mm 3.5-5 lens. I have NO experience with anything else, and I was feeling a little lost in this sea of unfamiliar terms (coming strictly from a DVX100 world). Mark picked up on that, so I singled him out with thanks. But you are all very helpful, and I appreciate your responses. And, I apologize if I'm cluttering up the forum with what appears to be a redundant post.
 
So, just to update everyone-

I like the idea of vintage glass, and it seems a lot of people here are less than thrilled with the Canon 50 1.8 cheapo.
So, I've priced out the following with B&H's used equipment department:

Nikon 50mm 1.4 $149
Nikon 35mm 2.0 $179
Nikon 75-150mm 3.5 $99 (!?)

What do you guys think?
 
draven4 said:
Nifty fifty was the first prime I owned when I bought the 7d. I do not recommend it. It will give you great image quality but

1. cheap build
2. too telephoto
3. not usable for many situations because of the telephoto (I know it's the same reason as 2 but I must stress this)
Click to expand...

The cheap build is something to consider, though the images from this lens are impressive considering the price.

As for #s 2 and 3, there is no other 50mm out there that will be less "telephoto" than this one. You have to know why you're purchasing any prime lens, and why you'd need that focal length. Don't purchase a 50mm lens and expect a wide frame, and likewise don't get a 20mm lens and expect to get a tight frame.

One must also take crop factor into account, as an APS-C sensor like the T2i, with a crop of 1.6x, means that a 50mm lens has roughly the same field of view as an 85mm lens (80mm, to be exact) on a full-frame sensor.

So recommending some one avoid a lens due to the field of view doesn't make sense. There are plenty of places where a 50mm lens can come in handy. Do you need a wider frame? Try somewhere in the 24 or 35mm neighborhoods, though the 1.6x crop factor puts those at 38mm and 56mm equivalents, respectively.
 
C2V said:
The cheap build is something to consider, though the images from this lens are impressive considering the price.

As for #s 2 and 3, there is no other 50mm out there that will be less "telephoto" than this one. You have to know why you're purchasing any prime lens, and why you'd need that focal length. Don't purchase a 50mm lens and expect a wide frame, and likewise don't get a 20mm lens and expect to get a tight frame.

One must also take crop factor into account, as an APS-C sensor like the T2i, with a crop of 1.6x, means that a 50mm lens has roughly the same field of view as an 85mm lens (80mm, to be exact) on a full-frame sensor.

So recommending some one avoid a lens due to the field of view doesn't make sense. There are plenty of places where a 50mm lens can come in handy. Do you need a wider frame? Try somewhere in the 24 or 35mm neighborhoods, though the 1.6x crop factor puts those at 38mm and 56mm equivalents, respectively.
Click to expand...

I also didn't quite understand the telephoto logic there.
But, what I DO understand is that the build quality is apparently an issue for some. The guy at the store I was speaking with said his biggest complaint with the 50mm Canon is that the focus ring is very small and hard to use ergonomically, which makes it a more difficult choice to use if manually focusing on the fly.

Additionally, I understand if someone just plain doesn't like the look of the images it produces. The one thing I think everyone here agrees with is that glass is not all created equal. Between the build quality and some people just saying they don't care for the look of it, I decided to go vintage glass on all my lenses. These things have stood the test of time, and apparently people like them.

I hope I will too. Any comments on my choices above and their prices? Are these good? They're on hold for me, I'm placing the order tomorrow hopefully!
 
dishe said:
So, just to update everyone-

I like the idea of vintage glass, and it seems a lot of people here are less than thrilled with the Canon 50 1.8 cheapo.
So, I've priced out the following with B&H's used equipment department:

Nikon 50mm 1.4 $149
Nikon 35mm 2.0 $179
Nikon 75-150mm 3.5 $99 (!?)

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

Is the 50 listed as very good condition? 149 seems a little high for a lens in average condition, but if it's really clean, then it's a decent price.

My only concern about the three ranges you have chosen is that you do not have a lens on the wider range. You may want to consider a Nikon 24mm or 28mm. There is not a huge gap between a 35 and 50, but if you went 24 and 50 it would give you a wider range. Then later, if you felt the need to fill in between a 24 and 50, you could add a 35. Just a thought. I have a Nikon 24mm and find it a very useful lens to shoot with...not too wide and not too tight, but then again, it depends on what you are shooting and the purpose of the project.
 
the silly answer to that ever returning question is:
any lens will do the job if you have no other expectation than getting a picture.
but if you need a special requirement, low light, particular DOF, camera distance to subect,
special effect , price , technical needs like focus ring, lens diameter ,compatibility etc...
then you need to to narrow your choice as no lens is good for all.
this is not different than choosing a car or a washing machine.
you do not choose a lens because it is a 30 or 50mm , you chose a lens because
it is the one that fit your needs and you can afford it.

so you do not choose a lens and then select the criteria, you select the criteria and then
find the lens that match them.

My criteria are less lens is better (so prefferably zoom), need from very wide to slight tele (so from about 11 to 80)
fast lens to shoot in place likes restaurant and church without additional light, full range covered if possible for less
than the price of the body and filter size must be the same on all lenses so i can reuse accessories, and focus ring must all turn the same direction.
I don't care about stabilization, ultra sensitive lenses, sharpness, brand name, compatibility with other format (working on EF-S)
wheight or size of lens, or prime ones.

i ended up with tokina zoom 11-16 , 16-50, 28-80 all at f2.8 with filter size 77mm for total price about $1200
it is exactly what i needed, and i am very happy.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top