• New Patreon Tier and Early Access Content available. If you would like to support AVForums, we now have a new Patreon Tier which gives you access to selected news, reviews and articles before they are available to the public. Read more.
  • Black Friday Deals
    Visit our Black Friday page for our frequently updated, hand picked deals on TVs and other tech.

Lens Recomendations - 450D

jpwild

Standard Member
I have a 450D with kit lens and now getting use to it. I also have two Sandisk memory cards, a flipside 300, Redsnapper tripod and a CPL for the kit lens. I don't have a flash gun as of yet - I don't feel I need one as I wont be doing a lot of shooting indoors.

I was going to wait till the spring to get additional lens for the camera, but may get one soon.

I like lens recommendations for the following types: I have a rough budget of around £500 per lens. I like all types of the below styles, but obviously I may need a different sort of lens for each thing.

1) Landscape - as in hills, lakes etc. This includes taking images of water - blurring the water especially for waterfalls. I also like to take images in dusk/dawn conditions with sun. I've seen Sigma 10-20 being mentioned a lot, but not too sure. Would like multiple opinions before I splash the cash.

2) Slow aircraft - not fast ones like jet fighters but more airport bases coming into land etc.

3) Street and city photography. I want to take images in cities, towns and streets. I love buildings and the various types.

I'm not interested in taking images of motor sport and birds.I don't really thing I'm that interested in portrait photography either.
 

senu

Distinguished Member
I assume you refer to the Canon 450D

Are you finding the "kit " lens limiting , if so why?
Also Analyse your photos and ask which focal length you use most

You can take landscapes without an UWA lens but It may also be handy for Buildings ect
But for People shots in the urban environment your standard lens range is fine

Slow aircraft will need Zoom of some sort

In short there is no one lens that will do it all( without compromise or indeed all very well)

Do you as such want a kit lens replacement,A Zoom lens or an Ultrawide.. or indeed wish to hold on to your kit lens and get some pocket friedly Zoom and UWA
That would depend on your budget but be careful not to buy a lens for decent money which will get limited use after he initial flurry of excitement
most Folk take 85-90% of thier Pics with the lens they use the most

Using myself as an example of the typical bloke with a camera and bunch of lenses , I use mine in the order of

  1. Walkabout
  2. 50mm 1.8/ 1.4 .. there is a certain joy from sharp well exposed images these can get you ( mainly for portraits to which you have said you are not that keen)
  3. Ultrawide angle ( Sometimes to get minimal distortion at focal lengths like 17mm which would annoy the walkabout used at that FL)
  4. Zoom 70-300, in part because it doesnt have IS and sharp pics handheld at the long end is , trying

Wish list
Zoom with IS and 35mm Prime ;The 50mm is too long sometimes.

Im sure some here who shoot Ducks , planes ect have a different use prevalence.
 
Last edited:

jpwild

Standard Member
Yes I have the 450D.The kit lens is good and a great starting point, but I would like additional lens for either of the categories I listed. I'm well aware that can't really get a lens that will do it all, but would like a lens recommendation for each of the categories I listed.

I don't have a specific focal length in mind. All depends on the environment I'm shooting. Obviously need a wide angle for landscapes, but unsure of which to get: Tamron, Sigma, Canon or Tokina.
 

senu

Distinguished Member
In short

A zoom lens for Taking Slow moving aircraft
and
Ultrawide angle ( The kit lens has wide angle)

And Perhaps for Buildings

My limited experience with UWA is that it tends to get more limited use than you might think even for Landscapes

Suggestions would be budget dependent too
 

jpwild

Standard Member
In short

A zoom lens for Taking Slow moving aircraft
and
Ultrawide angle ( The kit lens has wide angle)

And Perhaps for Buildings

My limited experience with UWA is that it get more limited use than you might think even for Landscapes

Suggestions would be budget dependent too

Yes.

Basically I need a recommendation for lens that is capable of shooting aircraft at airports. However, this is not my priority lens at the moment. My priority is the below, but would be nice to have ideas for the sort of lens.

I then need lens recommendation mainly for landscape photography which involves hills, trees, water, lakes. Also would that suggested lens be capable of producing good images in urban areas, or would I need a additional lens recommendation?

I've read the Sigma 10-22, Tokina 12-24m, Canon 10-22 and the Tokina 11-16 are very good for landscape photography, but again, I'm not sure which. Also once again I'm not sure which of the four lens would also be capable of producing good urban images as well or would I need additional lens for that sort of photography.
 

senu

Distinguished Member
Im sure there are folk here whose knowledge of lenses who will give excellent suggestions Im just just trying to help you refine the "wish list"
I wont stray away from what i use then . the Tokina 12-24 is fine but in UWA terms Im told even 2 mm less that 12 mm make a big difference

My only caveat ( Im hoping some one who shoots landscapes will help ) is that I wonder how often you will use them for landscapes.

My Zoom is the cheap but decent Sigma 70-300 DG APO .. I guess Im now onthe lookout for a zoom with IS.
A few from me
From Tokina 12-24









From Sigma 70- 300


 
Last edited:

senu

Distinguished Member
In short you can Assume that if any better lenses are suggested they wil help you get better than the above examples
 

jradley

Active Member
I've read the Sigma 10-22, Tokina 12-24m, Canon 10-22 and the Tokina 11-16 are very good for landscape photography, but again, I'm not sure which. Also once again I'm not sure which of the four lens would also be capable of producing good urban images as well or would I need additional lens for that sort of photography.

I think for the landscape work it is well worth considering a UWA (as you list above). As for which one...there is no easy answer to that. A search on this forum will find you many, many threads suggesting reasons to get one over another. They are all capable lenses, none of them representing poor value for money. BTW, don't forget the Tokina 12-24 comes in original and MkII - not sure how the MkII compares to the original but it is about the same price as the Tokina 11-16 which by many accounts was a better lens than the original 12-24 (probably due to shorter zoom range). I would suggest you search for review sites and maybe search on flickr for photos taken with each lens and see what you think. I'm guessing you won't see much difference in performance overall.

For the urban/street work teh UWA will probably be too wide. I would stick with the kit lens you have already for that. For the airplanes you will need something longer, Sigma or Canon 70-300 or the Canon 55-250 spring to mind, or, possibly even the 70-200f4L (without IS) is in budget and lack of IS wouldn't be an issue if using a tripod or shooting in good light.

Cheers,

John
 

senu

Distinguished Member
Its a bit hard to shoot moving airplanes with a tripod though:)
When I got the Tokina there was no 11-16 and Canon was much dearer , Sigma was kind of similar
 

senu

Distinguished Member
True.. My plane Pics were taken with an f4.. Hand held.
 

drsuave

Active Member

Jammyb

Well-known Member
I don't understand why you couldn't use a tripod to take pictures of a moving plane? Especially with a ball head.
 

senu

Distinguished Member
I don't understand why you couldn't use a tripod to take pictures of a moving plane? Especially with a ball head.
You certainly can
. But it isnt as practical as using your hands especially if you are panning to catch the plane
Also the angle you might wish to catch the plane in may not always be easy with a fixed tripod given the height and angulation you might want
IMHO , you lose a lot of flexibility on framing if you use a Tripod ( even with ball head)
 

The latest video from AVForums

Guardians of the Galaxy Xmas Special, Strange World, Bones and All, and Cabinet of Dr Caligari in 4K
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom