# Lenses for the Canon 500d



## Mindy

I am learning so much! I have ordered three books from Amazon on photography that were recommended from here, and have been searching/reading here and also the Internet. I don't have a dSLR camera just yet and I am looking at the Canon EOS Rebel T1i 500d without the kit lens. I want to get an EF-S 18-200mm lens or thereabouts. But I have some questions about lenses. I can't resist asking questions if you don't mind!

I've reviewed the 450d because I assume that compatibility with 450d will be similar to the 500d. i.e., body is plastic, dimensions and weight are the same, etc.

I understand EF and EF-S is the mount for the lens. I have only seen one 18-200mm lens and it is a Canon and an EF-S. I really can't get a good feel about lens compatability from all that I have read. What do you think of the Canon lenses? If a camera is an EF EF-S, then is it limited to only those lenses? What are the good brands of lenses I should be looking at?

Thanks so much.


----------



## flyin-lowe

I am a total Newb myself and probably the last one that should be answering a question but I thought the reason that you see the "S" (EF/ EF-S) is for image stabilization.  I THINK (and I could be wrong) that the EF-S will be will have image stabilization and the EF won't.
If Im wrong I guess we can learn together.


----------



## Overread

Cameras that have an EFS mount are crop sensor cameras- that means that the image sensor in the camera is smaller than that of an older film 35mm camera (which is called full frame in the digital world).
EF lenses are made for 35mm sensors - full frame cameras, but willl also work just as well on a crop sensor camera as the outer areas of the captured image (though the lens) is cropped of and not used - you don't even see this through the viewfinder.
EFS lenses are made for crop sensor cameras only - that means they contain less glass as they don't include there ares that are normally cropped off by the crop sensor cameras - thus they are generally lighter (less glass). Further they will not fit onto full frame cameras - if they were to do so then the captured image would have a lot of vignetting (shadows round the edges of the image) where there is no glass to give any light.

EFS lenses come in all sorts and some are very high quality bits of glass, but non are L standard (canon lable for top range) because canon reserve that lable for fullframe lenses only.
WIKI - with illustrations:
Crop factor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As for your situation I would get the kit lens with the 500D camera and learn to use that first - get a feell for things and a lens to give you a grounding before moving on. An 18-200mm lens is very versatile, bit its image quality is poor since it has a lot of focal range to move though from 18mm to 200mm which means lesser performance than shorter zoom or even prime lenses that cover similar focal lengths.

EFS lenses do not have image stabalization - for canon lenses that is indecated by the lable "IS" (image stabalization) in the full name of the lens. Such as Canon  EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
Note also that f4-5.6 means that the minimum aperture (smallest f number) goes from f4 at the 17mm end to f5.6 at the 85mm end -- you cannot thus have f4 at the 85mm end.
Also USM - Ultra Sconic Motor - is an auto focus motor normally much quieter than regular focusing motors which also allows you to use manual focusing without having to turn the auto focus off (though it will not work if you have auto focus set to a continuous tracking mode since then the AF is always correcting the focus to what the camera wants)


----------



## rufus5150

All Canon SLRs are compatible with their EF mount lenses. This includes the coveted 'L'-glass which is their _luxury_ or professional glass. They feature much more solid build quality, they're durable as hell, many of them water-sealed (this doesn't help on much beyond the 1D series bodies, though), they autofucus incredibly fast and they mostly very heavy. One very good general walk-around L (the 17-40mm) is priced at $700 which is incredible for the type of glass you get.

The 1.6-factor crop-sensor cameras (xxD and xxxD, except the 10D) will also accept their EF-S mount. The EF-S lenses will not work on the 5D, or the 1D series. The EF-S lenses, by and large, are consumer to high-end consumer lenses. They vary in quality but the range has some exceptional lenses. They have a lot of plastic in the builds so they're not as durable. Of the EF-S, I've heard good things about the 17-55MM 2.8 IS, the 10-20mm and the 60mm Macro.

Beyond their kit lenses, most Canon lenses range from decent performer to amazing lens. Other brands to consider are Sigma, Tokina and Tamron. I can't comment first-hand on the latter three, but I do know people who use Simga and Tamron glass and are happy with their results.

Personally, I would hestitate buying something that encompases such a long range such as 18-200. Especially in a consumer grade lens, you're going to find that the ends generally have to give a lot in terms of image quality for a lens to encompass that same range.

You can view Canon's entire linup of lenses here:

Canon EOS SLR Camera Systems

Most searches on Amazon will give you plenty of reviews of each of those lenses.


----------



## Mindy

rufus5150 said:


> All Canon SLRs are compatible with their EF mount lenses. This includes the coveted 'L'-glass which is their _luxury_ or professional glass. They feature much more solid build quality, they're durable as hell, many of them water-sealed (this doesn't help on much beyond the 1D series bodies, though), they autofucus incredibly fast and they mostly very heavy. One very good general walk-around L (the 17-40mm) is priced at $700 which is incredible for the type of glass you get.
> 
> The 1.6-factor crop-sensor cameras (xxD and xxxD, except the 10D) will also accept their EF-S mount. The EF-S lenses will not work on the 5D, or the 1D series. The EF-S lenses, by and large, are consumer to high-end consumer lenses. They vary in quality but the range has some exceptional lenses. They have a lot of plastic in the builds so they're not as durable. Of the EF-S, I've heard good things about the 17-55MM 2.8 IS, the 10-20mm and the 60mm Macro.
> 
> Beyond their kit lenses, most Canon lenses range from decent performer to amazing lens. Other brands to consider are Sigma, Tokina and Tamron. I can't comment first-hand on the latter three, but I do know people who use Simga and Tamron glass and are happy with their results.
> 
> Personally, I would hestitate buying something that encompases such a long range such as 18-200. Especially in a consumer grade lens, you're going to find that the ends generally have to give a lot in terms of image quality for a lens to encompass that same range.
> 
> You can view Canon's entire linup of lenses here:
> 
> Canon EOS SLR Camera Systems
> 
> Most searches on Amazon will give you plenty of reviews of each of those lenses.



Yes I've been reading the reviews on Amazon, but as far as other lenses I didn't know what to look for. The 18-200mm lens on Canon's website didn't get very good reviews (or was it some place else?). The reason why I want a lens like this is because I am interested in taking photos outdoors of nature like animals and birds. It's difficult to get them up close you know. 

So it sounds like I should keep the EF lenses in mind. I wanted to get large coverage all in one lens thinking it would save me money in the end and not get the kit lens. So perhaps I shall wait until later to get a telephoto lens.

Thanks


----------



## Mindy

Overread said:


> As for your situation I would get the kit lens with the 500D camera and learn to use that first - get a feell for things and a lens to give you a grounding before moving on. An 18-200mm lens is very versatile, bit its image quality is poor since it has a lot of focal range to move though from 18mm to 200mm which means lesser performance than shorter zoom or even prime lenses that cover similar focal lengths.
> 
> EFS lenses do not have image stabalization - for canon lenses that is indecated by the lable "IS" (image stabalization) in the full name of the lens. Such as Canon  EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
> Note also that f4-5.6 means that the minimum aperture (smallest f number) goes from f4 at the 17mm end to f5.6 at the 85mm end -- you cannot thus have f4 at the 85mm end.
> Also USM - Ultra Sconic Motor - is an auto focus motor normally much quieter than regular focusing motors which also allows you to use manual focusing without having to turn the auto focus off (though it will not work if you have auto focus set to a continuous tracking mode since then the AF is always correcting the focus to what the camera wants)



I'm confused. You say EF-S lenses don't have IS? The kit lens for the 500d is an EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS. Doesn't that mean it does have image stabilation?

Also, if I want to shoot out of doors, I would think I'd need another lens. Perhaps I ought to get two lenses: the kit lens and another lens like a 55-? or a 70-? for telephoto.

Thanks.


----------



## Overread

if wildlife is your intent then you need to be looking at 300mm lenses - the 70-300mm lenses are generally poorer (again its a long zoom coverage) but they are good learner lenses and some are not impossible to use in good light and stopped down to around f8.

However too much of this is going to need you to have some grounding in the hobby before terms start making real world sense to you. Honestly I would get the camera and its kit lens and then look at something like:
Canon 70-300mm lens - more expensive than many but decent quality
Sigma 70-300mm APO macro - make sure its the later APO edition of the lens.

Either of those would give you the ranges to start playing around and finding things out for yourself without breaking your bank balance. From then you can start to get a feel for how different focal lengths work/ how the gear works/ what your needs are as a photographer (basically what your shooting style is)/ how much you are willing to get into the hobby (small cars cost less than some lenses). 

Until you have that grounding in things too many choices that you have to make on getting good kit are going to be hard to understand and put into real world context


----------



## Overread

Mindy said:


> I'm confused. You say EF-S lenses don't have IS? The kit lens for the 500d is an EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS. Doesn't that mean it does have image stabilation?
> 
> Also, if I want to shoot out of doors, I would think I'd need another lens. Perhaps I ought to get two lenses: the kit lens and another lens like a 55-? or a 70-? for telephoto.
> 
> Thanks.



Sorry bad wording on my part - I mean that EFS does not tell you if a lens does or does not have IS. Its just the lens mount type - IS tells you if a lens has image stabalization - if its not listed in the lenses name than it does not have this feature.
Note that 3rd party companies (like sigma) use a different term name - OS (optical stabalization). Its the same thing but under a different name (Nikon call it VR - vibration reduction)


----------



## Mindy

I'm with you there, Overread, with regards to learning the hobby and the terms better. Before I read your post I was actually looking at 70-300mm canon lenses on amazon, and one is only $200. It received mixed reviews though. I suppose the $200 job is probably a good fit for a noob. The really nice ones are rather pricey.

So I've learned a lot today!


----------



## Samanax

Mindy said:


> I'm with you there, Overread, with regards to learning the hobby and the terms better. Before I read your post I was actually looking at 70-300mm canon lenses on amazon, and one is only $200. It received mixed reviews though. I suppose the $200 job is probably a good fit for a noob. The really nice ones are rather pricey.
> 
> So I've learned a lot today!


That's probably the EF 7*5*-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III USM (non-IS). It goes for about $200. There is a EF 7*0*-300 f/4.0-5.6 IS USM lens, but it costs around $550. And there is also a EF 75-300 f/4.0-5.6 IS USM lens that usually costs around $350 but that one is out of production.

My suggestion is to look at the EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS lens instead. I have the EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III and frankly, it's an awful lens. Very slow to focus, pretty bad CA (chromatic aberration or purple fringing) at full zoom. The EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS lens is said to be a pretty decent lens to use. Costs about $250.

You'll also want to look at the EF 50mm f/1.8 II "Nifty Fifty" so that you also have a lens you can use in low light situations. It's generally available for about $85.


----------



## Mindy

Thanks for the tips on those lenses. It seems like every time I read a review, regardless if it is 5 out of 5 or not, there is most always negative comments on image quality. That is the most important aspect in photography IMO!

I guess I'm looking at either 1) EF-S 18-200mm IS, 2) EF-S 55-250mm IS, or 3) EF 70-300 IS USM. They are a bit pricey so I think I will experiment with the camera/kit lens before committing to any of these. But I still want to learn about lenses now, so that I can be prepared in the future. Thanks.


----------



## Mindy

I've been doing more research. I was looking at the 50d camera. But as far as price and features, for my needs I'm better off with the t1i. But I did look at the kit lens for the 50d and I like it. I really want a lens that I can use once I'm over the learning curve. It is the [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Canon-28-135mm-3-5-5-6-Standard-SLR-Cameras/dp/B00006I53S/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1239137823&sr=1-1"]EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM zoom[/ame]. It might be a zoom but you can also get as close as 1.6 feet.

Would anyone like to comment on this lens? I've heard many good things about it in reviews, and well also some bad. But I guess no lens is perfect unless you spend the big bucks.


----------



## nikonpreap

get a nikon d90


----------



## inTempus

Mindy said:


> But I guess no lens is perfect unless you spend the big bucks.


Even the ones you spend big bucks on aren't necessarily perfect either.  Google the 50mm f/1.2 and read about the back focusing issues at various f stops.  You have to learn your lenses and the settings where they perform at their best, and at what settings they aren't so hot.

I have the 28-135 and I shoot with it on my 50D occasionally.  It's a good all around lens.  There are things that bug me a little, like when you're walking around the lens tends to fully extend itself (change focal length).  On my L lenses they stay put to what you set them to.  But that's a minor annoyance.  The IQ is generally pretty good in my experience.


----------



## Mindy

tharmsen said:


> Even the ones you spend big bucks on aren't necessarily perfect either.  Google the 50mm f/1.2 and read about the back focusing issues at various f stops.  You have to learn your lenses and the settings where they perform at their best, and at what settings they aren't so hot.
> 
> I have the 28-135 and I shoot with it on my 50D occasionally.  It's a good all around lens.  There are things that bug me a little, like when you're walking around the lens tends to fully extend itself (change focal length).  On my L lenses they stay put to what you set them to.  But that's a minor annoyance.  The IQ is generally pretty good in my experience.



It doesn't take much IQ to know that one must learn how to use their lenses. I just want my first lens purchase to be a smart one. Thanks a bunch.


----------



## j-digg

Mindy, by IQ tharmsen meant Image quality . I actually have started myself off with my 18-55mm IS kit lens and the 2 lenses Samanax reccommends above. In my opinion, they are both good lenses to start off with. By no means are they top of the line products, but they are great to use while learning your new found hobby. The 50mm 1.8 is very fun to experiment with shallow depth of field, and since you're into outdoor photography the 55-250 is a relatively long lens. Also, both are _very _cheap ( when talking about price in terms of photography ) although some may say just save the money you would spend on these for some more quality glass down the line. Either path isn't a terrible decision in my eyes.


----------



## TBE

nikonpreap said:


> get a nikon d90


without wanting to hijack the thread, is it worth the upgrade from a D80 to a D90?  I bought a D80 late last year and have read the D90 offers higher end specs as well as some new features like video etc.


----------



## Mindy

j-digg said:


> Mindy, by IQ tharmsen meant Image quality .



haha Thanks for the clarification. 



j-digg said:


> I actually have started myself off with my 18-55mm IS kit lens and the 2 lenses Samanax reccommends above. In my opinion, they are both good lenses to start off with. By no means are they top of the line products, but they are great to use while learning your new found hobby. The 50mm 1.8 is very fun to experiment with shallow depth of field, and since you're into outdoor photography the 55-250 is a relatively long lens. Also, both are _very _cheap ( when talking about price in terms of photography ) although some may say just save the money you would spend on these for some more quality glass down the line. Either path isn't a terrible decision in my eyes.



I'm just looking to purchase one lens at the moment. Instead of the kit lens for the 500d I'm looking at the kit lens for the 50d. I have looked at and like the recommendations mentioned in this thread thus far, and have saved them in my "wish list" on amazon so that I can keep up with what I am looking at. I think the 28-135 would give me the coverage I need without starting out with two lenses.

But after looking at the 50mm 1.8 on amazon, it really looks good. I've saved that to my list also. And I've discovered the 50mm 1.4 USM and that looks good as well. 

Thanks for the feedback.


----------



## bigtwinky

I borrowed a 28-135 from a friend a few months ago and it was a good lens.  It worked well, decent focusing speed and the range was nice.  The Image Quality wasn't as sharp as with the higher end lenses, but thats the trade off you get for the price.

If budget is a concern (as it is for most of us), you might want to have a look at the 3rd party lenses from Sigma and Tamron.  Lots of reviews on here about them.

But if you just want to go with 1 lens for now and want to keep the price down, the 28-135 would be a good choice.  You won't be doing that much wildlife photography with this lens though.  For bird pictures, you'd want something 300+.

While all focal ranges can yield great pictures, you typically get a wide angle lens (10-24) to do lanscapes, cityscapes, street photos.  You would get something in the 85-110 range to do portraits and people shots.  You would get something in the 200-300 range to do sports.  You would get something in the 300+ range to do wildlife.

All these numbers are ones for a full frame camera (ie - not a crop senso camera).  The Rebel series (350d, 400d, 450d, 500d) and the prosumer series (20d, 30d, 40d, 50d) are all crop sensor cameras (ie using EF-S and EF lenses).


----------



## Mindy

Hi Budwinky, thanks for your post. Yes I do love birds.  Since the beginning of this thread, I've been looking and learning, and I will probably go with the 28-135mm for starters. When I'm ready for a longer range lens, I'm thinking about the [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-300mm-4-5-6-Lens-Cameras/dp/B0007Y794O/ref=wl_it_dp?ie=UTF8&coliid=I2PYE2QA5OMF0E&colid=25UW18EFXNX60"]70-300[/ame]. But I am keeping my mind open and will continue to look at all the "angles" 

Thanks again.


----------



## wildcats

bigtwinky said:


> While all focal ranges can yield great pictures, you typically get a wide angle lens (10-24) to do lanscapes, cityscapes, street photos.  You would get something in the 85-110 range to do portraits and people shots.  You would get something in the 200-300 range to do sports.  You would get something in the 300+ range to do wildlife.
> 
> All these numbers are ones for a full frame camera (ie - not a crop senso camera).  The Rebel series (350d, 400d, 450d, 500d) and the prosumer series (20d, 30d, 40d, 50d) are all crop sensor cameras (ie using EF-S and EF lenses).



Because the 500D is a crop sensor camera does that mean it won't need quite as long of a lens as a full frame camera? I'm still trying to fully comprehend the difference between the full frame and crops sensor. I understood it to mean that the full sensor is like that of a 35mm camera and the crop sensor cameras would take a smaller image than the full frame but make it SEEM like this is a longer reach on the lens.  Is this correct?  I'm basically wondering how the lens range for your above subjects would change, if they would, for a crop sensor camera?


----------



## musicaleCA

wildcats said:


> bigtwinky said:
> 
> 
> 
> While all focal ranges can yield great pictures, you typically get a wide angle lens (10-24) to do lanscapes, cityscapes, street photos.  You would get something in the 85-110 range to do portraits and people shots.  You would get something in the 200-300 range to do sports.  You would get something in the 300+ range to do wildlife.
> 
> All these numbers are ones for a full frame camera (ie - not a crop senso camera).  The Rebel series (350d, 400d, 450d, 500d) and the prosumer series (20d, 30d, 40d, 50d) are all crop sensor cameras (ie using EF-S and EF lenses).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because the 500D is a crop sensor camera does that mean it won't need quite as long of a lens as a full frame camera? I'm still trying to fully comprehend the difference between the full frame and crops sensor. I understood it to mean that the full sensor is like that of a 35mm camera and the crop sensor cameras would take a smaller image than the full frame but make it SEEM like this is a longer reach on the lens.  Is this correct?  I'm basically wondering how the lens range for your above subjects would change, if they would, for a crop sensor camera?
Click to expand...


Without getting into the specific differences, since that is a multi-faceted issue I'm just too sick to deal with right now: Canon (APS-C), multiply by 1.6. Olympus (4/3), multiply by 2. Nikon (APS-C) and anything else (unless I'm forgetting something), multiply by 1.5.


----------



## DennyCrane

I recently purchased the 70-300mm IS USM lens for my T1i, and it's a terrific lens. Well worth the investment. I'd also recommend the kit lens to start with, then the 70-300, and maybe a 50mm prime.


----------



## ssnxp

Hmm.. interesting thread. 
To the OP: I bought a 50D with the 28-135 that you're thinking of getting. I really have nothing to compare it to besides the kit lens that the T1i came with, since I owned that for a few days. In general, I find the 28-135 more versatile, of course.

I can see myself using it as my "walk around" lens for now, but I do see myself acquiring a close portrait prime for indoor/party shots (24mm, 28mm, 35mm, or 50mm?) and a better zoom (not even sure yet, those are damn expensive) to fill out the "extreme" ends of the spectrum. After I get a flash and all the other gear, I think. 

I'll probably be stuck with the 50D kit lens (And HOPEFULLY a good wide angle prime) for a long while before I get that L zoom.


----------

