T2i: Kit lens?

KarmaInitiative

KarmaInitiative

Active member
Hopefully i'm getting a t2i (for video) within a couple months and I'm trying to plan out what im gonna buy. Ive always felt like it made more sense to buy a body + a nice lens cause most people don't like kit lenses. However, the lenses that people recommend for video are $$$$.

Should i drop the $100 on a kit lens or put it towards a better lens?

Lens suggestions appreciated too
 
does it come with the 18-55?That lens is pretty lousy. I'm selling a canon 18-135. Id be willing to give it to you for a fair price. Then you would have a lens that is a little bit better, and still have not spent serious cash.
 
Or for $100 you could get their fantastic-plastic 50mm prime lens which is what I did when I bought my t2i. Zero complaints about it here.
 
save your money, the ef 15-85 f3.5-5.6 IS USM is a great lens for a 1.6x body, kinda pricy but you can find it used for cheap (~$550) if you are willing to wait. that would be my choice, awesome video lens for skiing park and pretty much everything else. but if your really into photography maybe your money would be better spent on an L series lens. you can get a used 17-40 f4L USM for about the same price.
IF i could go back to when i bought my first slr body i would have shelled out a bit of extra cash for a better lens, 500 seems steep but it will afford you to choose from many great starter lenses that will still be useful to you when you are no longer a beginner.
 
this, however i'd recommend getting the kit before the prime so you have somewhat control over zoom if you need it.
 
Kit lenses are an absolute waste of money. My favorite prime lens cost $25, and you can find some real gems for $100 (Pentax 50mm 1.4) that are much better.
 
tamron 17-50 vc. zoom with much better optics.

the kit lens will do if its all you can afford, but if you have the money go for a better option, itll save you the upgrade later
 
Here is my beef with the kit lens: for the price you pay, you are getting a shitty lens. For the same money or less, you can find much nicer lenses. Images made with the kit lens are almost unusable because it puts out such a poor image. Even if you're a beginner, once you upgrade to a better lens you will smack yourself in the head for not going that route and saving $100 in the first place.
 
That lens sounds just as shitty as the kit lens just with slightly more range. Non fixed aperture = shit.
 
you can find old manual focus lenses for the same or less. but if you are just learning with a camera, starting out with a manual focus lens could be rough.

im not trying to deny it, the kit lens is less than stellar. but for 100 bucks to get a lens with zoom, and a decent af, itll do until you can upgrade if you are short on the cash.
 
That doesn't make any sense. Using a manual lens is the first stepping stone to photography. It doesn't get much easier, unless of course you want to use a shitty autofocus lens and spend all your time pressing one button.
 
fair enough. i was just thinking in terms of action shooting and blowing the shot because you didnt have it quite properly focused

but enough thread jacking. back to the op. kit lens is not great.

tamron 17-50 is the way to go imo.

 
only thing good about the kit lens is the 18mm focal length. Variable Aperature blows.

get 50mm f/1.8
 
so im in the same boat as the op, but with a just purchased / pre-ordered nikon d3100

i was wondering if any one had thoughts on the kit lens that comes with this camer (18-55mm lens)

also for my next lens i was thinking about

http://opteka.com/opteka65mmf35manualfocusasphericalcircularfisheyelensfordigitalslrcameras.aspx

or

http://www.amazon.com/Vivitar-Manual-Fisheye-Digital-Cameras/dp/B003UNSK2Y/ref=sr_1_50?s=STORE&ie=UTF8&qid=1284748822&sr=1-50

any thought on those?

sorry for the thread jack
 
the opteka and vivi are the same fishey.

so is the bower, samyang, and a couple others i cant remember. they are all made in the samyang factory and just printed with different names. although for some reason the samyang does have slight vig even though the others dont.

its not a great lens, but its really your only option for a true fisheye on a crop sensor other than the absurd L series one
 
Yes, even when using manual exposure for video (as you should be, since auto's even worse)the aperture will automatically change as you zoom from 18mm to 55mm. Maximum aperture at wide end (18mm) is f/3.5 and max at telephoto (55mm) is f/5.6. Therefore, if you have the aperture set at max at the wide end, it will stop down as you zoom (changing exposure).
 
A lens with non-fix aperture (for instance the 17-55 3.5-5.6 or whatever the t2i kit lens is) has like 14 glass elements in it, while a 17-40 4L has probably like 4 or 5 glass elements. If the aperture isn't fixed, theres alot of shit going on inside the lens.
 
Fixed aperture. It doesn't matter if you shoot on manual because it has to do with the mechanics of the lens. It doesn't apply to prime lenses because you cannot zoom with them, thus all primes are fixed aperture. It's when you zoom with a non-fixed aperture lens that the aperture automatically changes as you zoom in. Some lenses are designed in such a way that the aperture remains constant as you zoom (fixed aperture), and are generally more desirable.
 
Still trying to figure out what lens to get. I'm only looking at fixed aperture cause I'm doing video and I wanna avoid primes for my first lens.

Here's the lenses that I'm considering right now http://mihal.us/cb

They all look like dope lenses, but they're all real expensive compared to the $100 kit lens. Plus i didn't see anything about stabilizers in these lenses, and i know the kit lens has a stabilizer
 
Tamron 17-50 2.8 would be a real nice all around, the canon 17-55 might be a little better, but not 600 dollars better. If you want L glass, the 17-40L is a very nice lens but has been known to be a little soft (NBD for video). Those three lenses will all be very similar and IMO id get the tamron is if you want a 17-50 ish lens.

Now, the tokina 11-16 2.8 is a LEGIT wide lens, much different then those other 3. The tokina will only be a good wide lens though, so if you want an all around lens, again, the tamron will be a good budjet lens for that. If you have a little more money, stepping up to the 17-40 4L would be good. Going up to the 17-55 2.8 seems unnecessary to me.
 
that tokina is a sick sick lens. I've seen it before in action and used it myself, and it really performs.

I'm reiterating everyone elses point by saying don't get the kit lens, buy a cheap prime and a mid range zoom for starting. I'd highly recommend the 50mm f/1.8 for it's value, I love it to death (until it breaks on me, which they do).

As for non fixed aperture, I'd have to agree for the most part. I don't mind my 10-20mm Sigma DCM EX, and it's non fixed. f/4- 5.6. It produces some great pictures, but I only really shoot on 10mm with it, so the distortion is pretty noticeable. I wouldn't shoot on a non fixed standard zoom for sure, like that kit lens.
 
it was between the tamron and tokina for a lens i wanted to use for followcams and i think im goin with the tokina now.
 
I've heard only good things about the Tokina.

...then again I've never used one so I guess I can't talk, but hey, hearsay is hearsay ;)
 
Case in point: the Helios 44 58mm f/2:

4676361687_f3d0e96545.jpg


got mine for $25. Fast, sharp, metal housing...you can't go wrong.
 
seriously! check pawn shops, local classifieds you can easily find an old pentax with this lens.. or a 55 1.8...kit lenses suck. i got a old pentax camera with a pentax 50mm 1.4 for 30$.. just look
 
no body is debating whether or not they are not of the best quality. but when you are talking about spending $500 or lower, options begin to disappear quickly starting with versitile fixed aperture lenses. so when talking about a great all around lens for about $500, the 15-85 isn't a terrible choice it does use SOME ultra low dispersion glass which is what is used in L lenses (along with aspherical elements, and flourite elements). but like i said before, a 17-40 f4L or a 70-200 f4L are about the same price. personally i would choose an L lens but for a first lens to explore wide angle and telephoto focal lengths 15-85 isn't a bad choice.
 
nah the only thing a stabilizer does is kind of compensate for the shake when you take a picture and make it less blurry. For video if you want your footage to be smooth you'll need something to stabilize the whole camera like a glidecam, tripod, shoulder mount, etc.
 
nobody needs a lens with stabilizer for video purposes. People who shot 16mm seemed to get along without it just fine...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top