File :-(, x, )
yay for upgrades rix
hello /p/
i need thoughts on the following lens kits for my 400D:
sigma 70-200 f/4-5.6 APO DG OS macro telephoto
canon EF 55-200 f/4.5 - 5.6 USM II
sigma 18-200 f/4-5.6
sigma 18-125 F/3.8-5.6 DC OS HSM

anyone have any experiences using these lenses? can anyone confirm if the sigma 70-200's front element rotates, negating any use for polarizing filters?

in turn i kick myself for not waiting for the 450D
>> Anonymous
What do you want to do with it? What lenses do you own now?
>> SAGE SAGE
450d is shit, enjoy your NOT wasted money
>> woops rix
OP here, forgot to mention that i wish to do the following with the lenses:
macro photos
portrait photos
landscape photos
so yeah likely ill need a versatile telephoto lenskit for under $350.00 ;)
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
You can use a polarizer with a rotating front element. You just need to hold onto it when you half-press the shutter button. I use a polarizer with my cheapass 80-200 sometimes.
>> Anonymous
>>130676
What lenses do you own now?
>> gah rix
OP again.
I have the shitty 18-55 kit lens.
was too excited to use it, therefore spent for that lens ;)
>> Anonymous
>>130683
I'd suggest forgetting these slow zooms. None of them will do you much good in low light, probably few if any of them will do macro, and their quality will probably be low. Not much better than the kit, maybe even worse.

Pick up a 50/1.8 and a 28/1.8, or if you can't afford it, a 28/2.8. The 28mm is what's called a "normal" lens, because it approximates the way the human eye sees and is thus extremely versatile and easy to learn on. Usable for near everything. The 50/1.8 is $80 and makes a great portrait lens. When you want wider focal lengths, use your kit lens; for macro work, buy some extension tubes.
>> hmmm rix
>>130678
wont that mess up the lens thread?
and wont longer lenses make it more difficult to prop / adjust zoom length etc? <-- this is me whining about rotating front elements. please do not pay attention to it :(

man, i really wish the 18-200 was more affordable (and was in the realm of f/2 while im dreaming about it ;) )
>> elf_man !!DdAnyoDMfCe
>>130688
Or you adjust the polarizer after the camera focuses. Whichever you prefer.
>> rix
     File :-(, x)
>>130687
yeah the 50 f/1.8 is in the to-buy list before any of these other lenses. but my point is that
1) i would like to cut down the lens changes to a minimum
2) id like the zoom range to be versatile and useful enough even at marginal conditions and changing locations

In turn i lazily submit a large-ish photo of a copper(?)saucer

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 400D DIGITALLens Size18.00 - 55.00 mmFirmware VersionFirmware 1.1.0Owner NameunknownSerial Number1530810317Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:12:24 21:38:56Exposure Time1/13 secF-Numberf/5.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Lens Aperturef/5.0Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length43.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1936Image Height1288RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualScene Capture TypeStandardExposure ModeManualFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeSharpnessUnknownSaturationNormalContrastNormalShooting ModeManualImage SizeSmallFocus ModeOne-ShotDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeOffCompression SettingFineMacro ModeNormalSubject Distance0.270 mWhite BalanceTungstenExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed288Camera Actuations-1872690960Color Matrix129
>> Anonymous
the whole point of slr is you can change lenses for each situation

if you want a one lens wonder, get the sigma 18-200 3.5-6.3 OS since it's the only superzoom at a cheap price for canon mount

a 17-85 IS is fine too
>> rix
>>130698
given the 18-200 is still a long way from my price range, would the gap between my kit 18-55 and the sigma 70-200 f/4-5.6 APO DG OS (i can get one for $190) be that noticeable for example in street / nature photography?
>> Anonymous
what the fuck kind of lens is that

sigma doesn't have something like it
>> rix
>>130708
heh
http://www.photographyreview.com/mfr/sigma/35mm-zoom/PRD_345540_3128crx.aspx
my bad its a 70-300 f/4-5.6 APO DG
>> Anonymous
ugh, if you absolutely want a telephoto it's better than nothing

you have to realize 70mm after 1.6 is really long, you'll need to be fairly far away from your subjects if you want them in your frame