Ok I thought so, but wasn't sure. What does he mean by look at how many mms I want by looking at my kit lens? :S If you have any idea - lol

zoom with ur kit lens and look how meny mm your most confoctable with

Hmm... okay... that is an issue, I dunno! LOL! I'm not even sure I'd like that too much... not being able to zoom... wouldn't it be annoying??

This post was edited by chantal7 on Mar 19 2009 11:29pm

nah its not annoying, might take a bit to get used to tho, but it teaches you lots of things since you are able to use low f-numbers and you need to think about composition before taking the pic more.

Well not sure if you want hear any of the shit I have to say but the mm thing is kinda like how much your lens zoom in on things. The higher the millimeter (mm) number is the larger the object appears. It is also called focal length. Hope this helps.

Are you looking for an all around lens or just one for close up portraits? The 50mm everyone is telling you to buy is probably only good for indoor portraits and almost useless for outdoor landscape. I know you have the 10-20 sigma for landscape but MAYBE you want a lens that also has IS (Image stabilizer) and/or wider maximum aperture (lower f number) for low light outdoor and stuff. In that case you may want to look at the Tamron lens or the one I am using... From what I have read in thephotoforum.com people usually buy lenses that cover the entire range they need. So if you are into landscape and occasional indoor portraits and stuff you need lenses that cover 10mm - 50 or higher depends on how much you want to zoom in.

I know I am not good at taking pictures but I do have read quite a lot about lenses especially on thephotoforum if you have time and energy you should check out this: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/photography-equipment-products-news-reviews/
because that's where people usually post equipment they bought or asking for advice.

heh I think Antichrist is just trying to get you into low light portrait photography here lol JK

This post was edited by Futurama on Mar 20 2009 12:36am

Ok thanks!



The problem I'm having is having a lens for indoors... sucks having to use a tripod indoors just because it can't go lower to let more light in. I do want an all round lens, and I don't really need IS - cause if I need a tripod I'll use it. I'm trying to eliminate using a tripod when I really don't need to use. I've already covered the 10mm part, I need the other I think...

Btw Futurama, I didn't ignore you.... just because I didn't quote your precious comment doesn't mean I didn't ignore you. I simply said "Thanks for the information everyone... I am still just looking and will decide on this later."

once you try primes you don't go back

Well then I guess the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 would be perfect for you. Unless you are willing to spend like 1500 bucks on the EF 24-70 f/2.8 L lens which is probably one of the best wide zoom lens you could get with money. Well I don't know how much you are willing to spend but I am actually thinking about getting one of those very expensive wide angle pro lenses in the future. Well far into the future lol. I think the maximum aperture of f/2.8 of that Tamron lens should be more than enough for indoor shots and it would also give you a much nicer background blur.


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/Canon-EF-24-70mm-f-2.8-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx



Well correct me if I am wrong but if you go prime you may will have to buy several lenses to cover certain range instead of just having one...
not everyone is willing or could afford to spend several thousands of dollars on lenses

This post was edited by Futurama on Mar 20 2009 12:15pm

well...
I would be more than happy with just a fast 24mm a fast 50 and a fast 135

I think the primes that are good to have are close to normal range (like a 35, a 50 and maybe a 85).
The primes I just mentioned, the non L versions too are really really good and would amaze a zoom user. Oh, they can all be had for like 800ish dollars (and that's 3 amazing lens).
BTW I am referring to the Canon EF 35mm f2, Canon EF 50mm f1.4 and Canon EF 85mm f1.8. To me these would be the ideal complement to a wideangle like the 10-20