canon 1000d

[Firefox]

hi

i just used a canon 1000d for the first time yesterday and i quite like it. the only problem is i would like some good zoom lenses that arent too expensive i would also like a good but agin not expensive macro lens.

can anyone give me a hand, any advice would be much appreaciated

Firefox

[Swift Fox]

Sigma is probably your best bet if you don't want to spend too much on lenses as they tend to be half the price of the original Canon lenses. It all depends what sort of zoom lens you are after such as a 70-300mm for example:

Canon = £427
Sigma = £293

I got these prices from warehouse express just for a comparision, as i said it really depends what sort of lens you want as there are lots of different zooms and macros available but i think it is worth bearing in mind that it is worthwhile investing in good lenses in the long run. I'm sure others might have better advice for you

It would be handy to know your budget as that will help find suitable lenses for your price range

[Geoff F]

. . . and there are also a lot of things which I would like; but unfortunately, like your wishes, they won't be cheap.

My advice to you, and anybody else in the same situation, is never ever go for any ultra cheap lenses. They always work out dearer in the long run because you soon ditch them and buy what you should have purchased in the first place. If money is tight, save for something decent.

What to advise though, will depend on exactly what you want to photograph. Is the zoom for birds? If so you might just manage with something that goes up to 300 mm if you can get close enough to larger birds. Beyond that, we start to approach the serious price league.

But do you really need a zoom? A prime lens (fixed length) will give excellent quality at a slightly more realistic price. But if you want a general purpose lens; then, yes, go for a zoom.

What sort of macro photography? For flowers, etc, you should manage adequately with something under 100mm which will be a little more modestly priced than a 'proper' insect lens which would ideally be at least 150 mm.

But I have just spent at least £800 of your money (spending other people's money is great fun) and I haven't even asked if you also considered a 500D body; and preferably a 50D. Although you may find a good deal on the excellent but older 40D.

So, to sum up, have you considered secondhand equipment? Good quality secondhand (from a reliable dealer) may well be a better bet that buying low quality new equipment.

However, before we can effectively start spending your cash, we need to know exactly what you intend to photograph and how much you can afford, including saving for a while to stretch funds a little further.

[squishy]

For a low budget macro lens, have a look at a second hand tamron 90mm.

I know many people who can vouch for the quality of this lens.

[Ukwildlifeo]

Originally Posted by Geoff F

What sort of macro photography? For flowers, etc, you should manage adequately with something under 100mm which will be a little more modestly priced than a 'proper' insect lens which would ideally be at least 150 mm.

I have a 100mm macro and find it fine for insects. That said steve (Fourwings) + Dave (Pressld2) have teh Sigma 150mm and swear by it. The extra reach is no doubt useful, but in a bush/meadow scenario the longer the distance between you and the insect, the more chance of there being a twig/leaf/blade of grass in the way, at least in my experience. Plus the Tamron 90mm or Sigma 105mm are around £300 new, so cheaper.

[Firefox]

Originally Posted by Swift Fox

Sigma is probably your best bet if you don't want to spend too much on lenses as they tend to be half the price of the original Canon lenses. It all depends what sort of zoom lens you are after such as a 70-300mm for example:

Canon = £427
Sigma = £293

I got these prices from warehouse express just for a comparision, as i said it really depends what sort of lens you want as there are lots of different zooms and macros available but i think it is worth bearing in mind that it is worthwhile investing in good lenses in the long run. I'm sure others might have better advice for you

It would be handy to know your budget as that will help find suitable lenses for your price range

well,

for now about £200

[Firefox]

btw geoff you were talking about cheap.. is this cheap Tamron 55-200mm f4-5.6 Di II LD Macro Lens - Canon Fit or is it good?

and the zoom was for birds yes and the macro for mainly flowers but for some insects too like damselflys and dragonflys

[Firefox]

Originally Posted by Geoff F

. . . and there are also a lot of things which I would like; but unfortunately, like your wishes, they won't be cheap.

My advice to you, and anybody else in the same situation, is never ever go for any ultra cheap lenses. They always work out dearer in the long run because you soon ditch them and buy what you should have purchased in the first place. If money is tight, save for something decent.

What to advise though, will depend on exactly what you want to photograph. Is the zoom for birds? If so you might just manage with something that goes up to 300 mm if you can get close enough to larger birds. Beyond that, we start to approach the serious price league.

But do you really need a zoom? A prime lens (fixed length) will give excellent quality at a slightly more realistic price. But if you want a general purpose lens; then, yes, go for a zoom.

What sort of macro photography? For flowers, etc, you should manage adequately with something under 100mm which will be a little more modestly priced than a 'proper' insect lens which would ideally be at least 150 mm.

But I have just spent at least £800 of your money (spending other people's money is great fun) and I haven't even asked if you also considered a 500D body; and preferably a 50D. Although you may find a good deal on the excellent but older 40D.

So, to sum up, have you considered secondhand equipment? Good quality secondhand (from a reliable dealer) may well be a better bet that buying low quality new equipment.

However, before we can effectively start spending your cash, we need to know exactly what you intend to photograph and how much you can afford, including saving for a while to stretch funds a little further.

is this good for birds then:
Tamron 70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD Macro Lens - Canon Fit (5525) - Warehouse Express
or
Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 APO Macro Super DG Lens - Canon Fit (508927) - Warehouse Express

[Geoff F]

I haven't used either of those lenses but have a read of this review site which lists both Sigma AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG macro - Review / Test Report

But to sum up their reports, both are optically tolerable but the build is on the weak side, as you would expect at that price. They appear to slightly prefer the Sigma although sharpness does drop off at 300 mm.

Certainly for birds, I wouldn't recommend anything less than 300 mm. Also, when using 300 mm and for macro work, I would suggest investing in a good tripod; but expect to pay close to £100 for a 'middle of the range' item.

Personally, I would suggest using a 70-300 which would also be acceptable for Dragonflies, etc. Ideally, I would recommend the Canon 70-300 IS but we have already mentioned that one comes in at nearly £500.

For serious macro, I use the Sigma 180 mm and find that even at that size I often get more than 50% 'flyaways' before I get sufficiently close for a really decent sized photo.

However, I started macro work with a 70-300, plus a tripod, and it worked reasonably well down to hoverfly size.

[Swift Fox]

Geoff has given some good advice, regarding the 70-300mm i use the Canon IS lens which although cost me quite abit as your saw on my previous post although i think it is worth the money and i use it with a 550D body. If you only have £200 to spend it might be worth looking at the Sigma but i would personally save up a bit more for a better lens as it would be better in the long term.

I have included some macro shots i made with the 70-300mm and it is a very flexible lens and the IS does help if you don't want to use a tripod. If you want better detail and the subjects are smaller you would need a dedicated macro lens like Geoff said but i've found the 70-300mm lens to be very good for most subjects.