Need help - Canon 5D Lenses - DPChallenge Forums

05/09/2008 06:23:17 PM · #2

The Tamron 28-300mm Macro is NOT the best choice for a camera like the Canon 5D. What is your budget? What are you going to use it for? I would recommend as a starter the Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS.

violinist123

Canon EOS-6D

Tamron AF 28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di VC LD Aspherical(IF)Macro

05/09/2008 06:30:50 PM · #3

Any lens that contains 'canon' and 'L' in the description will get the most out of your 5D for you.

inherentdark

Canon EOS-5D

05/09/2008 06:32:21 PM · #4

Budget is definitely a concern. At the moment I'm hoping for something between $500-$700 range. The Canon 24-105mm looks great but it is a bit above my budget.

doctornick

Apple iPhone 13 Pro

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III

05/09/2008 06:44:07 PM · #5

Depending on whether you want to shoot wide angles or telephoto shots I'd recommend the Canon 70-200mm f/4L for tele shots and the Canon 17-40mm f/4L for wide angles. So for 700$ you can't have both but you can have one of the better lenses to go with your 5D.

Caravela

Olympus 12-45mm /f4.0 Pro

05/09/2008 06:44:11 PM · #6

you should have concentrated more on getting a decent lens and less on the camera! You can get very good results with the canon 350D for example + a set of good quality lenses. No point in getting such a fine camera if your not going to mate it with good quality glass!?!

Lens choice on your budget, how about 70-200 f/4 or 17-40 f/4, depends what your preferred focal length is!

Caravela

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III

Olympus 12-45mm /f4.0 Pro

05/09/2008 06:45:27 PM · #7

Originally posted by doctornick:

Great minds think alike!!!

hanneke

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

05/09/2008 06:54:32 PM · #8

Originally posted by Magno:

Great minds think alike!!!

Yup ;)

Tez

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

05/09/2008 07:04:01 PM · #9

my vote goes with the 17-40L for now. You can find them over at Fred Miranda (.com) for $500 no probs. Then you could try and find an 85mm 1.8 for about $250-300 which should be possible.

Easy peasy ;)

jwillerton

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

05/09/2008 07:27:50 PM · #10

I have the set-up that is being suggested. I use my 17-40L for landscapes and the 70-200L for portraits and what not. Take a look at my profile or my website to get an idea of what this combo will produce....

www.jwillertonphotography.com

Sorry for the shameless plug...but in this case it actually should serve a purpose. ;)

Anyway, I agree with everyone else...you really need to put a high-quality piece of glass in front of the 5D in order to see its maximum potential. I know its a tough pill to swallow, but you did buy a pretty expensive camera and it deserves high-quality glass.

I also might suggest the 24-70L lens if you can only get one lens...the 17-40 is not a good portrait lens since it tends to distort the subject. Unfortunately, it looks like all these lenses are outside your budget...

Tamron AF 28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di VC LD Aspherical(IF)Macro

05/09/2008 07:58:32 PM · #11

Without a doubt I agree with the other posters that you need a lens upgrade. I also agree that for the long end, the 700-200/4 is an exceptional lens. Where I'm torn is the recommendation of the 17-40. The combination leaves a unnoticeable gap between 40mm and 70mm, and for many photographers, 17mm is wider than needed. While 17mm covers a 93 degree horizontal angle of view, a 24mm lens covers 73.5. The difference is just not as big as you'd expect, and the 24-70 or 24-105 lenses are better at the wide end than the 17-40 is, especially in the corners.

ETA: If you really want to see what the 5D can do, throw a cheap Canon 50/1.8 lens on there and fire away at f/5.6 or f/8. You'll be amazed at what comes out.

Message edited by author 2008-05-09 20:00:07.

inherentdark

Canon EOS-5D

05/09/2008 08:24:39 PM · #12

Thanks for all the advice! I'm feeling a bit down now as I believe I went in the wrong direction. I think at this point I either A: need to downgrade cameras (Canon 450 w/ really awesome lens) or B: keep my current camera, return the lens I have and just wait until I can afford the lens to match it.

05/09/2008 08:32:53 PM · #13

Originally posted by inherentdark:

On a budget, try the Tamron 28-75mm and the Canon 50mm f/1.8. The Tamron gives you relatively wide to short tele, and the 50/1.8 gives you a fast-aperture prime.
Save for the 70-200.

figaro

05/09/2008 08:37:06 PM · #14

Originally posted by inherentdark:

Think about exactly what kind of shooting you'd like to do. You can still get the best out of that amazing camera with a couple of primes - I'd suggest the Canon 50mm f/1.4 or even the f/1.8, combined with the equally awesome 85mm f/1.8.

If you need a general purpose zoom then you would get decent (but not L standard) image quality with the popular Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8, which you could probably pick up quite cheaply used.

It's not for me to say whether the above is preferable to a 30D/40D + L glass or not. But it seems a shame to have such an amazing camera and downgrade it!

figaro

05/09/2008 08:37:33 PM · #15

Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by inherentdark:
Thanks for all the advice! I'm feeling a bit down now as I believe I went in the wrong direction. I think at this point I either A: need to downgrade cameras (Canon 450 w/ really awesome lens) or B: keep my current camera, return the lens I have and just wait until I can afford the lens to match it.

On a budget, try the Tamron 28-75mm and the Canon 50mm f/1.8. The Tamron gives you relatively wide to short tele, and the 50/1.8 gives you a fast-aperture prime.
Save for the 70-200.

So many great minds at work today!

Prof_Fate

05/10/2008 12:26:50 AM · #16

Skip the 50 1.8...it's a $70 lens and NOT a good match for a 5D. You're already in that boat so don't add water while you're still bailing.

If L glass is too pricey, perhaps mid-range canon glass (50 1.4, 28 1.8, 85 1.8 - USM equipped primes, there are many of them) might work well for you.

Perhaps the third party 'good glass' might work as well - sigma's EX lenses or tamron's SP lenses.

For macro the best all around lens is canon's 100 2.8. Sigma/tamron offer similar macro prime lenses.

also seriously consider used glass - it's a lot cheaper than new and if/when you sell it you will lose very little. I have a tamron 24-135 SP lens that is extremely sharp and does macro - while I've not tried it on a 5D is should do very well there. Over at fredmiranda.com are lens reviews with ratings - go look and see what scores well. Most lenses are a compromise of some sort and only you can decide what you can live with, or without.

Nikon AF Nikkor 35mm f/2.0D

05/10/2008 08:32:08 AM · #17

Originally posted by Prof_Fate:

Skip the 50 1.8...it's a $70 lens and NOT a good match for a 5D. You're already in that boat so don't add water while you're still bailing.

Huh? Although the 50/1.4 is arguably a better lens, the 50/1.8 can produce stunning images, and it's hardly a "poor match" for the 5D. The suggestion was to add a very inexpensive fast prime to get a feel for what a fast prime can do.

Originally posted by Prof_Fate:

also seriously consider used glass - it's a lot cheaper than new and if/when you sell it you will lose very little.

Good used glass is often nearly as expensive as new (value is retained), unless you are talking about third-party lenses, then yes.

Prof_Fate

05/10/2008 08:50:41 AM · #18

I had a 50 1.8 - compared to the kit zoom it's better, but don't every say it's good glass. It's got terrible CA and isn't sharp wide open (compared to better lenses).
You buy a 1.8 lens to shoot it at 1.8. Having to stop it down to get acceptable results makes it a waste.

The OP isn't happy with the sharpness of what he has now, so recomending to him the cheapest lens canon makes is probably setting him up for disappointment again.

What about PP? No one here has talked about how SLRs, particularly the Pro models like the 5D have stronger AA filters and require some USM to get sharp images - so it may not be totally a lens issue.

Message edited by author 2008-05-10 08:51:08.

hopper

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

05/10/2008 10:20:52 AM · #19

obviously, you've had a bad experience with the 50/1.8 ... the lens is awesome

add the fact that you suggested the tamron 24-135 and I'm left stunned

edit to add ... I just check over at photozone ... the 50/1.8 is sharper in the corners at 1.8 than that tamron ever gets in the corners at any aperture

Originally posted by Prof_Fate:

Message edited by author 2008-05-10 10:24:33.

zarniwoop

Nikon D50

05/10/2008 10:50:30 AM · #20

Originally posted by Prof_Fate:

You buy a 1.8 lens to shoot it at 1.8. Having to stop it down to get acceptable results makes it a waste.

Not necessarily when it's the cheapest lens around. I mean if you were paying extra for the speed, then that sentence would make sense.

05/10/2008 10:51:34 AM · #21

Originally posted by Prof_Fate:

What about PP? No one here has talked about how SLRs, particularly the Pro models like the 5D have stronger AA filters and require some USM to get sharp images - so it may not be totally a lens issue.

Stronger AA? You've got it backward. The 5D has much weaker AA and needs much less sharpening than the XXD models. With good glass, I can turn sharpening totally off in RAW conversion and still have great detail rendition. Do the images benefit from a little sharpening? Yes. But even the Canon-recommended 300 - 0.3 - 0 setting is too much.

figaro

05/10/2008 11:23:01 AM · #22

Originally posted by Prof_Fate:

Comparison between 50mm 1.4 and 1.8 at f/2 - although the 1.8 isn't quite as sharp or contrasty - it actually performs substantially better in the corners. The CA's you speak of are practically non-existent. At f/8 the differences are negligable - f/8 comparison. I think you might have had a bad copy.

Your comments about the lens not being sharp wide open seem a little unfair - no lens performs best wide open, and a quick look at test images show that the 1.8 is sharper wide open than both the 1.4 and 1.2 L.

That said, the bokeh is not as good - but frankly if you're on a very tight budget I think it's a great choice for the 5D, despite its cheap plastickyness!

doctornick

Apple iPhone 13 Pro

05/10/2008 11:28:21 AM · #23

Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by Prof_Fate:

What about PP? No one here has talked about how SLRs, particularly the Pro models like the 5D have stronger AA filters and require some USM to get sharp images - so it may not be totally a lens issue.

Stronger AA? You've got it backward. The 5D has much weaker AA and needs much less sharpening than the XXD models. With good glass, I can turn sharpening totally off in RAW conversion and still have great detail rendition. Do the images benefit from a little sharpening? Yes. But even the Canon-recommended 300 - 0.3 - 0 setting is too much.

I concur! Converting my files from RAW with NO sharpening produces stunningly sharp images, much sharper than files from my 1D II using the same lenses. Love the 5D!

MelonMusketeer

Nikon D7000

Nikon MF 50mm f/1.4

05/10/2008 11:48:22 AM · #24

No one seems to have mentioned the possibility of camera shake.
I agree that a good or even fair prime lens can outperform most zooms.
I would see about renting or borrowing a few different lenses to see what you like, and how they compare to the one that you use now.
Keep the 5D, and save for lenses, or even better, get the ones you need with credit , and pay for them in time payments. That way, you will not be using precious time to shoot those "once in a lifetime" images that you will not be happy with due to a hardware problem.
In the mean time, shoot and enjoy shooting and learning with what you have.

rider