Canon dSLR users: which lenses?

The kit lens leaves me lacking...

Anything tried and true that is recommended?

Opinions on non-Canon made lenses?

~Matt Segal

Your mention of the kit lens implies that you're using the DRebel and not the 1Ds. See the list in my signature line below. Some prefer the Canon 100mm over the Sigma. The new 10-22 should also be very good.

I have the new 20D.

~Matt Segal

What lens did it come with Matt?

EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 kit lens (equivalent to 28.8-88 for a 35mm sensor with the 1.6x crop).

~Matt Segal

I have the new 20D.

 

~Matt Segal

Congrates! The basic choices remain the same.

For wideangle the most popular so far is the Sigma 15mm FE. The general opionion is that there isn't much difference between this and the Canon version, and this cost less. I expect the new Canon 10-22mm to be very good.

For macro and medium size fish the Sigma 50mm works well. It focuses down to 1:1 where the Canon only goes to 2:1. In practice, it's really hard to get down to 1:1 with a 50mm lens. Still I think the closer focus has some value.

Both Sigma 105mm and the Canon 100mm will focus down to 1:1. I've been happy with my Sigma. The Canon has the advantage that it allows switching between manual and autofocus during a dive.

Are you talking about topside uses or land or both?

The range on that lens could be great for midrange fish portraits of various sizes, as well as being able to get the odd shot of Mr Big if he shows up out of the blue...

Take a look at the Dietz gallery from their Wakatobi ttrip, and you will see a number of shots with a similar lens.

The bottom line is that you are going to want at least 3 or 4 lenses just to cover the bases with your new rig.

Are you talking about topside uses or land or both?  

Both, but I do have a feeling I'll be doing more telephoto stuff topside...so not much of a conflict in deciding on lenses between the two uses...

The thing about the kit lens, is it's not necessarily the highest *quality* lens...love its demonstration of the AF capabilities of the camera though...

The bottom line is that you are going to want at least 3 or 4 lenses just to cover the bases with your new rig.

Ahh, yes. I was waiting for when I would be spending more and more money...lol

~Matt Segal

The thing about the kit lens, is it's not necessarily the highest *quality* lens...love its demonstration of the AF capabilities of the camera though...

 

~Matt Segal

The kit lens cost around $50 depending where and how you bought it. It's probably the cheapest lens you can buy, so the expectations shouldn't be too high.

depending where and how you bought it

:?: Umm...it came with the camera? Hence, kit lens :wink:

~Matt Segal

depending where and how you bought it

 

:?: Umm...it came with the camera? Hence, kit lens :wink:

 

~Matt Segal

Yes. I was trying to say the difference between buying it with the kit lens and without is around $50.

I've posted samples taken with the DRebel using lenses I metioned here:

http://fototime.com/inv/2C14DB68E3D2A1F

where most are shot with the Sigma 15mm FE or 50mm macro.

Here are a few shots with the 105mm. The first and last one were not cropped.

http://wetpixel.com/modules.php?op=modload...6201&highlight=

I Use with my D60:

A Canon 16-35L Very expensive but worth every Euro/Dollar. When I use it with a Diopter under a Big dome it is a very flexible lens. If I get real close I can even get desent pics of Nudibranches (Cropping the pic to about 1/4 size afterward is ok when you convert the pic to the Biggest Size in ACR) and do good WA shoots. Also my Favourit lens on Land.

A Canon 50mm Macro. Also A Flexible lens. Can only do 1:2 but is on the other side also apable to shoot some "bigger" stuff when it comes by. Some people prefer the Sigam because it can do 1:1 but I haven't tested it yet

A Canoon 100mm Macro great Lens but not easy to use UW. I'm still learning but it is very promising

On Land Additional:

A Canon 100-300 IS as Travel Tele

and

A Sigma 50-500 as big Tele

I will probably bua a Sigma 15mm FE or a 14mm next year

(just bought a second D60 on Ebay and about to order a second DS125 so my budget is used up)

I plan to get the 20D some time before my next dive trip. I've been using a Nikonos V. One of the things that I did like about the Nikonos was the ease of choosing lens. With the 20D, there are lots of choices, but I think that I have an idea of where I will start.

First: The small critters - EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM

Second: Reef scenes ??? - EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM or EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM or EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye. At the moment, I have no real idea. What is equivalent to the Nikonos 15mm? Would a zoom work?

Third: Anglefish ??? - Lost again. Where does the cheese wiz go?

Fourth: Sharks, mantas ??? - Wide angle zoom again?

Well I have until June to get it together. And I hope that the price comes down and some of the announced lens become available. Until then, I appreciate all the advice on this and other forums. And I am taking notes on the equipment listed in members' signatures.

Hi,

the Nikonos 15mm lens 94° FOV equals a 20mm lens on a fullframe/film camera. To get 94° on a 20D would require 12.5mm WA.

15mm fisheye on 20D gives you 107.2° FOV (108.1° on the 10D/300D sensor).

The 16-35mm on a 20D meets the Nikonos 20mm lens with almost 80° FOV.

Also nice about the 10-22mm: close focus 24cm, thats perfect with a zoom lens and could avoid a dioptre depending on the dome you buy.

Julian

I use the Canon 100mm macro -- I agree with Simon, it IS difficult to use underwater. I bought some dioptre lenses for it, hoping that will help. Haven't tried them yet -- anyone have any suggestions which to use? +1, +2 or +3 (or some combo)?

Also tried both 15mm fisheye and 14mm L rectilinear. Both are fun to use, but I think the 15mm fisheye is a little more useful.

I also have the 16-35 L, but no zoom ring for it... Will try later maybe?

-Erik

1Ds / 1DII + Subal

I have a two lens setup on my Sea&Sea housed D60 right now, which covers the bases I want at the moment. These are the two popular Sigma EX options, the 15mm FE and the 50mm 1:1 macro.

The sharpness of the 50mm just blows me away, try this...

That's a bearded fireworm from Gozo last week. I'll post a 15mm image later.

BTW, certainly with my standard flat port, the focus distance of 1:1 is so short you're probably going have the subject leaving greasy nose marks on the glass to use it :wink:

Martyn

For macro I use Canon 50mm + lifesize converter. It's a "two in one" solution. When I know I want to only shoot the little bitty guys (which is most of the time) I put on the converter and do 1:1. The working distance is minimal, and sometimes I fear I will accidentally squish a blenny getting too close

When I feel like shooting fish and then the 50 mm without the converter is good. Also, if I dive with non-photographers and am likely to move around more than normal or if I am diving new sites where I don't know what will show up (turtles, squid, other medium size critters) then it's good to have the 50 mm.

I have the kit lens and it's ok for taking pics of other divers or for small coral heads and such for but I am waiting for the 10-22mm to appear on the shelves. This is what I want to do for WA. I don't like fisheye distortion and since I'll sue this topside as well, The Canon 15mm is out of the question.

I belive your camera is not better then your lens, so I am basicaly a purist and use Canon lenses with Canon body. Having a good, basic camera with good glass is what counts. Not to pick on Sigma and other, they have resonable glass at good prices, but as I see it, it doesn't make sence to get the good body and skimp on the most important part (the lens).

A Canon 100mm Macro great Lens but not easy to use UW. I'm still learning but it is very promising

What makes it difficult to use a longer macro lens? I am thinking of switching from my G2 to a 20D for UW photography and love my Tamron 90mm above water. Is it the limited DOF? I do use MF above water, so this could indeed be a bit tricky UW.... AF on the Tamron is a bit slower, so that would be a reason to switch to the Canon 100mm because of the USM.

Any advice?

Two factors:

- Limited DOF

- Holding it still UW

but it can be learned I did 2 Dives with it so far and it was getting better on the second.

Another downside is that it really limits you to macro. With the 50mm you can still take a decent shot of something bigger. I will probably only use it if I'm pretty sure I want only to shoot macro on the dive.

I belive your camera is not better then your lens, so I am basicaly a purist and use Canon lenses with Canon body. Having a good, basic camera with good glass is what counts. Not to pick on Sigma and other, they have resonable glass at good prices, but as I see it, it doesn't make sence to get the good body and skimp on the most important part (the lens).

The Sigma 50mm is a highly regarded macro lens and, unlike the Canon 50mm, does 1:1 without an adapter. In fact, only the Canon short macro requires this as the Nikon doesn't either. All the major Japanese lens makers offer macro lenses of very high quality. No need for brand loyalty here. Some claim that the Tamron 90 and 180 are the finest macro lenses available for Canon or Nikon mount.

I find it interesting that many Canon users claim that the 50 and 100 are among Canon's best lenses and Nikon users say the same for their 60 and 105's. It appears that you can't go wrong with macro lenses.