Got a Canon Rebel XT for Christmas and need help with a lens....

[zaireguy]

DH got me a Canon Rebel XT for Christmas that came with the kit lens. I have been on Ebay looking at some lenses and would like to know what others recommend. I don't want anything fancy, for now , but would like something a little better then what I have.

Alot I have found on Ebay have been anywhere from around $28 and up. They just sound to good to be true for that price.

TIA!

Ronna
Mrs. Zaireguy

 

[Blazer88]

What type of lens are you looking for? Wide angle, tele-photo, macro? You also have to have a budget in mind as they can get quite expensive.

 

[jeffbrig]

Any SLR lens for $28 is probably an older, incompatible lens type, and probably doesn't have autofocus either. Your XT can use both EF and EF-S mount lenses.

Before recommending any lenses, you will have to tell us what you are looking for that the kit lens doesn't provide. More range? Better macro capability? Wider aperture? Better optical quality? Image stabilization? There are many lenses out there, and for the most part, you get what you pay for.

 

[zaireguy]

Ok, to give some idea what I am looking for, say I'm in the cheap seats at a NASCAR race and I want to get a AWESOME picture of the pit crews from where I'm sitting.

Another would be a good macro lens. I know DH wants me to take pictures of his corals.

I guess the kit lens is good enough to take pictures of my kids, but is there any better standred lenses?

As for the budget, I don't think DH would let me spend over $300 for a lens.

Thanks guys!!!

 

[BlueCorn]

That's going to be tough to do for $300.

There is the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 It fits your price range but has really mediocre reviews.

Double your bankroll and you could get this guy:

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM It's got image stabilization which would help with the zoom shots at the track.

Neither is a very good macro lens. That'll hit you for another $400-500

 

[hesaias]

For ANY sports, you need a fast lens. f/2.8 70-200 L, which will set you back about $1000. Its a huge lens, but you can add tele-extenders, 1.4X and 2X to increase the focal length.

If it were me, I would not get a non "L" lens for a canon. The quality of the L series is unmatched, IMO. That said, I would go with the 50mm Macro. Very nice lens and doed some very good shots.

Look at my pics thread. I took those shots with the kit lens and a 580EX Speedlight flash. They are not too shabby for that little kit lens, IMO.

 

[jeffbrig]

For outdoor sports, F4 is plenty fast to freeze motion. I recently shot a daytime college football game with my 70-200 F/4 and it did everything I needed it to.

 

[bureau13]

For macro, if you look around (check Ebay among other places, but of course be careful, as always) the EF-S 60mm can be head for less (slightly) than $400. Not quite as much magnification as the 100mm that a lot of people use, but still 1:1 on an XT I think.

For the sports stuff, I just got the 70-300mm with image stabilization that was mentioned above. Its not an L lens, and it was about $550, and while I'm still learning how to use it I've been extremely pleased so far.

jds

 

[hesaias]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9143907#post9143907 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jeffbrig
For outdoor sports, F4 is plenty fast to freeze motion. I recently shot a daytime college football game with my 70-200 F/4 and it did everything I needed it to.

Sports needs the shallow DOF the f/2.8 gives. Also if you are shooting hoops, or HS football.

 

[zaireguy]

Thanks for all help!! I really apperciate it!

Ronna