How'bout the 50/2.5 CM? and why not the 18-55 IS kit..?
...and I got a KodakGear labeled Tamron 80-210mm lens at a pawn shop for $10 (typically ebays for about $50) that stopped down a click meets the definition of good and really cheap...here's a sample shot that's pretty much full frame with minimal USM...
24 2.8 is a nice little lens. I had one that I bought from another FMer, and sold to another FMer, that was crazy sharp wide open, and had nice nice nice colors. I only sold it because my wife said "if you have a 24-70 2.8, why do you need a 24 2.8?"
Quite frankly, if you're stopping down, the EF-S 18-55 3.5-5.6 or whatever it is (I have one to use at 18mm f/8+) is a damn fine lens. I own it, and a few L's, but just because I have the more expensive lens, doesn't mean the cheaper one doesn't get pounded on.
I have a 50 1.8, and though my 24-70 is my main bread and butter lens (and consequently the one that's been getting the use when i've been selling a few photos), the 50 1.8 is my favorite lens. It's stupid slow AF that hunts, and misses, it's loud, but dammit it's like an old car or a fat girlfriend.
18-55 IS kit is the way to go if you want a zoom. The older cheap 28-xx or 35-xx zooms are mostly crap compared to the 18-55 and they don't go wide enough for a crop-body.
I also recommend alt. lenses if you don't mind manually focusing and stop-down metering. The Flektogon 35/2.4 is very sharp and focuses very close. There are tons of high quality 135/2.8s that you can get on the cheap (I got one for $25 in M42 mount and it works great). Older Pentax lenses are also great and mostly cheap.
Sam N wrote:
I also recommend alt. lenses if you don't mind manually focusing and stop-down metering. The Flektogon 35/2.4 is very sharp and focuses very close. There are tons of high quality 135/2.8s that you can get on the cheap (I got one for $25 in M42 mount and it works great). Older Pentax lenses are also great and mostly cheap.
Can anyone recommend a good resource for learning about alt lenses and what's required to use them?
You can just go the Alt board and ask a few questions. M42 (Pentax and old Russian) lenses are really cheap and most excellent. Olympus are great, but sell for about what Canon lenses (except the most common 50's). Leica-R are about the very best lenses you can buy and very cheap compared to Canon and way way better. Nikon works too... start looking at these 4. I've tried a bit of all but Nikon... Leicas are just brilliant! Adaptors can be bought cheap from China off ebay (I've never had a problem). Whether you body will meter correctly is going to be a question... but who needs a meter?
It's shockingly sharp, and has GORGEOUS bokeh (sorry, no pics immediately handy) and if you pay $50 then you got ripped-off.
The downside to this lens? The color is a little anemic, compared to a Canon L or Leica. It's also slightly more prone to flare.
---------------------
Vivitar Series-1 90mm f/2.5 macro (VMC version only) - If you find a good one WITHOUT the 1:1 adapter, it should cost under $200. Insanely, ridiculously sharp. Highly recommended if macro is important. For a general-purpose lens, it's slightly lacking in color, or "pop" but still quite nice.
-------------------
ZEISS CZ T* Planar 50mm f/1.4 I paid $180, delivered, for a perfect example. I prefer my Zeiss ZF 50mm Makro, but that's 5X the price. This gets you a very sharp 50, with the Zeiss Look, which is very different from the Canon Look. (less saturated, more analytical & more "like you are there"
-------------------
Olypus Zuiko 200mm f/4 - JUST GET THIS ONE. Well under $100.
-----------------------
Olympus - Zuiko 28mm/ 3.5 - A no-brainer if ever there was one. ~ $30 on a good day.
KenSimone wrote:
Can anyone recommend a good resource for learning about alt lenses and what's required to use them?
Try FM's own Alternative forum. Basically all you need is the correct adapter. Most lens mounts have a lens registration distance longer than the EOS mount, which means that it's possible to easily adapt them. Some exceptions are old Canon FD lenses and Minolta lenses. Some lenses have issues with hitting the mirror on full-frame cameras like the 5D, but you won't have that problem with any Nikon F, Olympus OM, or M42 lens. I think Leica R lenses are all problem-free as well. Pentax K will work but you have to remove the aperture lever to use it with a full-frame Canon.
You'll have to use stop-down metering with alt. lenses. This means the aperture doesn't automatically close to the selected value when you press the shutter button. This is a bit annoying and can sometimes slow you down. I still find using alt. glass enjoyable.
I recommend starting with M42 or OM lenses. There are plenty of affordable and high-quality options with those mounts.
Thanks, everyone, for all the input. I'll definitely be picking up a few of these lenses (probably starting with the 28-70mm f/3.5-4.5, wow that lens has some good reviews, and can be sniped on ebay for $100ish).
There's a live.com / ebay promo going on where you get 30% back from Microsoft on ebay buy it now purchases (search for "cheap xbox" on live.com and you'll see the link). That definitely changes the game a little. I used that get a new Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 for $250ish net.
FSJ_Guy wrote:
That's an excellent lens, too, but tends to sell for around $250 or so.
The 100-300 is a similar build, but a little slower ƒ-stop, IIRC. It's usually around the $200 mark.
If you look around a bit you can get a 70-210 3.5/4.5 for ~$150. That's what I paid for mine. Very nice lens. It's being compared to the 70-200L lenses (although that might be a bit of a stretch). IIRC the 100-300 is optically similar to the 75-300 lenses, which are not one of Canon's strongest offerings.
Or the Sigma 24-70/2.8 EX DG Macro. It's said to be soft wide open, however I think I've been lucky to find a sharp copy. I wouldn't go so far as to say "very sharp" but it's pretty good once you get a hang of the DOF.
