Best general purpose lens to go with 300D?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Geoff - 17 Jun 2004 20:06 GMT

I am becoming fed-up waiting for the Nikon D70 to come into stock, so
working on the theory that it is better to spend money on a good lens
- what lens might be worth teaming up with a Canon 300D? The body can
be got for around 450 ukp now (and there's no shortage of stock!) So
is there a good lens (wide to slight telephoto zoom) that will team up
with the Canon 300D and hopefully give good service for many years? I
would be prepared to spend up to £400 ($700) on the lens alone.

Reply to this Message

Jim - 17 Jun 2004 20:11 GMT

>I am becoming fed-up waiting for the Nikon D70 to come into stock, so
>working on the theory that it is better to spend money on a good lens
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>with the Canon 300D and hopefully give good service for many years? I
>would be prepared to spend up to £400 ($700) on the lens alone.

Noooooo.... wait for the D70. If you already have a film SLR
why not just stay with that until the digital first choice
comes along. That's what I'm doing - thought the camera to
switch me to SLR digital has yet to be made (I do own an
Ixus 400...) I say it's always worth waiting for the right
woman and the right camera ... :)

[To email go to my address and take out the dog...]

Reply to this Message

Surfworx Photography - 18 Jun 2004 05:52 GMT

Hi Geoff,

Interesting question, I'll try to give a couple of tips on, from Down Under.

Deciding which DSLR to buy depends upon precisely what lenses you want to
use, and for what applications. So, figure first what lenses you want to
use, then match them with the right DSLR. You will potentially spend say
$1200US on a DSLR (D70 or 300D) and can then potentially spend well over
$10,000US on lenses.

You prefer wide to slight telephoto zoom. I have a Fuji S2 DSLR, so I can
advise on Nikon related lenses - and not really Canon lenses. Canon lenses
receive superb reviews, but you can spend a small fortune on one. Depends
what you shoot, and what you want to do with the images.

The D70 I believe comes with kit lens 18-70mm, so to get the DSLR and this
lens would be a great start. Reviews on the 18-70 lens all indicate it is
surprisingly excellent. It will depend what you want to spend, but Nikon
17-55/2.8, 80-200/2.8 lenses are all highly regarded, and expensive.
Sigma provides an option for third party lenses, for both Canon and Nikon
mounts, they are alot cheaper lenses, but quality isn't as good. You might
think it is, until you use a prime lens from Canon/Nikon. Sigma, in my
opinion, makes not bad lenses as a much cheaper alternative to what you'd
prefer.

Do plenty of research, and don't rush into getting a DSLR simply because
it's available now. Plenty of pre-purchase planning will ensure you buy the
best product for your needs. Here's a couple samples of what some lenses can
do, from a hobbyists point of view. I'd also strongly recommend hiring
lenses to try them out, and look at second hand lenses:

Sigma 50-500/4-6.3 at 75mm
http://www.surfworx.com.au/AFLweb/pages/Z3%20-%20Danny%20Frawley.htm

Sigma 50-500/4-6.3 at 750mm
http://www.surfworx.com.au/AFLweb/pages/C%20-%20Ruck.htm

New, I think these are around $1200US. Not overly heavy, large, good
allrounder. Image quality is acceptable.

Sigma 14/2.8 at 21mm
http://www.surfworx.com.au/AFLweb/pages/R%20-%20Winners.htm

New, around $1200US. Nice lens, distortion on the edges. Glad I can hire it.

Nikon 80-200/2.8 at 300mm
http://www.surfworx.com.au/AFLweb/pages/B%20-%20Screamer.htm

New, around $1500US, but the older push pull lenses you can get for around
$600US. Superb optics, nothing more to be said.

Nikon 18-35/3.5-4.5 at 24mm
http://www.surfworx.com.au/Museum/pages/DSCF5742.htm

Nikon 18-35/3.5-4.5 at 52mm
http://www.surfworx.com.au/Museum/pages/DSCF5842.htm

New, around $1100US. On a DSLR, great range, great price, great optics.
Bargain.

The above and more lenses you can purchase second hand, roughly around half
the price of a new one. New lenses are like new cars, as soon as you get
them out of the shop, you lose value - sometimes big $$$.
Don't get too fixed on a $700US budget ( which is why I have'nt really
answered your question) because once you have a DSLR and a lens, you'll need
plenty of memory, perhaps a flash, a decent carry bag, rechargeables,
tripod, filters................ allow for the necessities too!

Good luck with the shopping!

Derrick

> I am becoming fed-up waiting for the Nikon D70 to come into stock, so
> working on the theory that it is better to spend money on a good lens
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> with the Canon 300D and hopefully give good service for many years? I
> would be prepared to spend up to ?400 ($700) on the lens alone.

Reply to this Message

Alan - 18 Jun 2004 10:02 GMT

I'm a very happy 300D owner.
Out of interest, where can you buy a body for around ?450? I'd buy a second
one if I can get one at that price!
As for a general-purpose "walkabout" lens, with more telephoto reach than
the kit lens look at the Canon 28-135mm Image Stabalized (IS) lens. This is
my most used lens and the picture quality is superb.
Loads of info on the 300D and various lenses here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1031

Alan.

> I am becoming fed-up waiting for the Nikon D70 to come into stock, so
> working on the theory that it is better to spend money on a good lens
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> with the Canon 300D and hopefully give good service for many years? I
> would be prepared to spend up to ?400 ($700) on the lens alone.

Reply to this Message

Willy Eckerslyke - 18 Jun 2004 15:05 GMT

> I'm a very happy 300D owner.

Glad to hear it. Out of interest, how many shots can it take in
succession at it's highest resolution before it needs to go for a lie
down? I'm not after 2.5fps with the shutter held down, but frame, shoot;
frame, shoot; etc., with a second or three between shots, IYSWIM.

Reply to this Message

mike - 18 Jun 2004 16:40 GMT

>> I'm a very happy 300D owner.
>
>Glad to hear it. Out of interest, how many shots can it take in
>succession at it's highest resolution before it needs to go for a lie
>down? I'm not after 2.5fps with the shutter held down, but frame, shoot;
>frame, shoot; etc., with a second or three between shots, IYSWIM.

From playing about with mine, it seems to be 4-5 frames continuous,
then at least a 2 - 3 sec lockout while it writes to the card, then it
allows another 2 frames, then 2-3 second writing to card and it allows
another 2 frames etc,etc,etc.

If you shoot the allowed 4-5 frames continous then wait for all
activity to stop, it seems to take about 6-10 secs to write them all
to the memory card.

I know that this is all variable on the subject matter as it will
affect the file size - a white cat in an igloo will allow almost
continous shooting :)

It is affected by the type of memory card also - an expensive one with
a decent IDE interface and buffer will be noticably quicker - i use
only Lexar cards and they seem very quick. I once borrowed a cheapo CF
card and it was noticably slower processing the images.

Michael

Reply to this Message

Willy Eckerslyke - 18 Jun 2004 17:38 GMT

>>Glad to hear it. Out of interest, how many shots can it take in
>>succession at it's highest resolution before it needs to go for a lie
>>down? I'm not after 2.5fps with the shutter held down, but frame, shoot;
>>frame, shoot; etc., with a second or three between shots, IYSWIM.

> From playing about with mine, it seems to be 4-5 frames continuous,
> then at least a 2 - 3 sec lockout while it writes to the card, then it
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> activity to stop, it seems to take about 6-10 secs to write them all
> to the memory card.

Thanks, I reckon I could live with that. About the only job I still do
on 35mm is aerial photography, where the cost of being there outweighs
the cost of film by enough to warrant shooting almost continually.
The downside is then spending the next couple of days slaving over a hot
scanner, hence the appeal of digital.

Have a good weekend.

Reply to this Message

lizard - 18 Jun 2004 17:45 GMT

>> I'm a very happy 300D owner.
>
> Glad to hear it. Out of interest, how many shots can it take in
> succession at it's highest resolution before it needs to go for a lie
> down? I'm not after 2.5fps with the shutter held down, but frame, shoot;
> frame, shoot; etc., with a second or three between shots, IYSWIM.

ok, i did 3 different tests on my EOS 300D shooting at 1/60 in manual mode
with the shutter button held down for a minute, these were *very*
unscientific :) I was using a PQI 40x 256 meg flash card that was
formatted before each run. When shooting like this the camera does its
first 4 buffered shots quickly, then seems to do a certain amount more
fairly quickly, then it slows to about 1 frame every 3 seconds when there
is plenty waiting to be written to flash.

first test, camera was pointing at a white wall.

first 4 frames = 2 seconds
next 6 frames = 7 seconds (9 total)
next 16 frames = 51 seconds (60 seconds total)

(26 frames total)

it then took 21 seconds for the compact flash activity light to go out.

second test, camera pointing at my monitor

first 4 frames = 2 seconds
next 4 frames = 7 seconds (9 seconds total)
next 12 frames = 51 seconds (60 seconds total)

(20 frames total)

it then took 30 seconds for the compact flash activity light to go out.

third test, lens cap on.

first 4 frames = 2 seconds
next 17 frames = 20 seconds (22 seconds total)
next 18 frames = 38 seconds (60 seconds total)

(39 frames total)

it then took 21 seconds for the compact flash activity light to go out.

Reply to this Message

Willy Eckerslyke - 21 Jun 2004 10:21 GMT

>>>I'm a very happy 300D owner.
>>
>>Glad to hear it. Out of interest, how many shots can it take in
>>succession at it's highest resolution before it needs to go for a lie
>>down? I'm not after 2.5fps with the shutter held down, but frame, shoot;
>>frame, shoot; etc., with a second or three between shots, IYSWIM.

> ok, i did 3 different tests on my EOS 300D

<snip>

Thanks!
So an average of 20 frames a minute is a realistic limit.
I wonder how the D70 compares.

Reply to this Message

lizard - 21 Jun 2004 12:15 GMT

>> ok, i did 3 different tests on my EOS 300D
> <snip>
>
> Thanks!
> So an average of 20 frames a minute is a realistic limit.
> I wonder how the D70 compares.

Yeah, I should have said that with the 2nd test where I got the 20 shots a
minute there was a very colourful scene as it had to process what was
displayed on my monitor and my desk so there was quite a bit of contrast
and detail etc. with each shot so I would think 20 shots a minute is
realistic.

Reply to this Message

Richard Cole - 22 Jun 2004 18:02 GMT

>Thanks!
>So an average of 20 frames a minute is a realistic limit.
>I wonder how the D70 compares.

According to the manual (and the tests I've read - see
http:\\www.dpreview.com and/or http://www.dcresource.com), the
D70 can manage 3.5 fps for as long as you have space on the CF
card.

Just been outside (bright sunny evening) and run a test (using a
freshly formatted Hitachi 1Gb microdrive) and it ran for just
over 5 seconds at full speed (20 frames) then slowed to about 0.5
sec intervals. Stopped for 10 seconds, then started again and got
back to 3.5 frames a second for 5 seconds (another 20 frames),
which suggests a CF card refresh problem.

I suspect that the speed it will depend upon the speed of your CF
card, perhaps a 40x CF will manage to maintain 3.5 fps for
longer. (The microdrive is known to be quite slow - see
http:\\www.dpreview.com and/or http://www.dcresource.com).

Like the OP I don't need this kind of speed (unless I can get to
the Tour de France this year when the entire field can go past
you in 15 seconds).

Richard
pnenina@epbyr.bet (ROT13 to e-mail me directly). See
http://www.caravanningnow.co.uk for most things to do with caravanning.

Signature

Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana. - Groucho Marx
1890-1977

Reply to this Message

Willy Eckerslyke - 24 Jun 2004 11:29 GMT

>>So an average of 20 frames a minute is a realistic limit.
>>I wonder how the D70 compares.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> D70 can manage 3.5 fps for as long as you have space on the CF
> card.

I'd heard that too, but took it with a pinch of salt, as one does!

> Just been outside (bright sunny evening) and run a test (using a
> freshly formatted Hitachi 1Gb microdrive) and it ran for just
> over 5 seconds at full speed (20 frames) then slowed to about 0.5
> sec intervals. Stopped for 10 seconds, then started again and got
> back to 3.5 frames a second for 5 seconds (another 20 frames),
> which suggests a CF card refresh problem.

Thanks Richard, that is mighty impressive!
Shame the damnned things are in such short supply or it would be an easy
choice.
Mind you I've just had another 300quid added to the pot, which widens
the net somewhat if you'll excuse the mixed metaphores.

Fujifilm S2 or Olympus E-1 anyone?

Reply to this Message

Martin Elms - 18 Jun 2004 22:40 GMT

The Canon 17-40 4L is a very good lens which will give good wide angle and
slight telephto with the 300D's 1,6 crop factor. It's going to be my next
one.

Martin

Signature

Please check out my picture gallery at http://www.mrx.no/MartinElms.html and
leave a comment on my photography.

> I am becoming fed-up waiting for the Nikon D70 to come into stock, so
> working on the theory that it is better to spend money on a good lens
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> with the Canon 300D and hopefully give good service for many years? I
> would be prepared to spend up to ?400 ($700) on the lens alone.

Reply to this Message

Smorgo - 19 Jun 2004 07:23 GMT

<snip>

> is there a good lens (wide to slight telephoto zoom) that will team up
> with the Canon 300D and hopefully give good service for many years?

The very best is the Canon 24-70 F2.8L. A truly awesome piece of glass.

> I
> would be prepared to spend up to ?400 ($700) on the lens alone.

Ah.

In that case, the Canon 17-40 F4L is the one to go for. Probably have to
stretch you budget a little, but it's a fantastic lens for the money.

Signature

Smorgo (Steve Morgan)
Hello: '01 VFR 800 FI, '86 V8 110
Goodbye: '01 NT650V
E-Mail address is spam-trapped. Use my first name at wormpurple dot com

Reply to this Message