Canon lenses ... suggestions? (Nikon OK)

Hello

I just bought a used Canon digital reflex.

Sadly it's body only, and I'd like your suggestions about the right size of lenses I should buy for it

I think Canon and Nikon have similar sized lenses, so if you have a Nikon and wants to give your suggestion... It's very welcome!!

Thanks :p

This always depends on what you want to do with these lenses, how much you are willing to spend and if your camera has a crop or full frame sensor.

May I ask which body you bought?

 

However, while I still had a DSLR with crop sensor my absolute favourite was the 35mm 2.0 from Canon.

Why? Because:

 

- you can get very close with it for a non-macro lens (minimal focus distance is 25cm!), which is not only cool for taking close-ups, but also shows you are not forced to step far away to be able to focus -> you don't have to fear your doll might fall while you are too far away to reach it

- it's suitable for smaller and bigger dolls, but also for taking pictures of people and really small figurines

- it's a very small and light lens

- it's cheap, but unlike the a bit cheaper 50mm 1.8 II still way better build

- good for low light situations

 

However, it's downside:

- it's pretty much the oldest prime lens Canon has to offer, thus it's a bit loud and slow

- lacks IS (helps when you have shaky hands, but is not a must)

- Bokeh is not thaaaat pretty

 

My 35mm was for a long time my absolute favourite and I used it for pretty much everything, for dolls, conventions, animals etc.

If money is not an issue, get the newer 35mm 2.0 which has a fast and quiet USM motor, IS, and wonderful bokeh while still having all the advantages of the old 35mm, but it's sadly also a bit more pricey.

 

Another favourite of mine is the 100mm 2.8 L Macro, but I'm using it on a full-frame camera right now and don't know how good it's for dolls on a crop. However, it's a super sharp and lovely lens, and for a L lens still rather cheap compared to their usual prices.

 

Usually people say you should get a 50mm lens, but I disliked that one a lot when taking pictures of my dolls. I got the 35mm shortly after buying my 50mm and never regretted that. On the full-frame it changed because there 35mm are already too far in the wide-angle area, and the distortion was too visible on doll pictures.

Thank you for your very interesting reply!

 

I bought a Canon 40D.

 

I was thinking about getting one of the following

(all Canon brand)

 

28-105

22-55

35-70

18-85

 

My price range is somewhere between 100 and 200€.

I already spent an eye on the camera body I can't afford super cool lenses right now >___<

 

I'm such a newbie with these things!

18-85 definately

18-85 definately

Why you so sure about it?

Anyway I mistyped, I meant 17-85!

I'm with Ara; 35mm all the way. I don't shoot Canon so I don't know the specifics regarding their lenses, but I've been using the Nikon 35mm 1.8 for over a year almost exclusively and it's one great lens. It's just a matter of taking a step forward or backward

18-55 isthe standard right?

I'm with Ara; 35mm all the way. I don't shoot Canon so I don't know the specifics regarding their lenses, but I've been using the Nikon 35mm 1.8 for over a year almost exclusively and it's one great lens. It's just a matter of taking a step forward or backward

But is the old 35-70 good the same? >_<

The new one is so expensive!

 

18-55 isthe standard right?

It's the new default. The old one was the (way better) 17-85 ~

But is the old 35-70 good the same? >_<

I meant a prime lens: Fixed 35mm.

On a low budget a fixed prime is definitely the way to go, particularly if you know you're mainly going to use the camera for a specific thing like doll photography. The 50 mm f/1.8 II is a very cheap and popular lens with superb image quality, but the build quality unfortunately matches the price - plastic inside and plastic outside. And the field of view on a crop body is fairly narrow. I haven't used a 35 mm prime myself, but as suggested, it should be very good on a crop body, very close to a "normal" perspective similar to what the human eye sees, and not very much more expensive than the 50 mm either.

 

One lens I've fallen in love with is also the 40 mm f/2.8 STM. It's a tiny pancake lens, very cheap, paid 130€ for mine and the image quality is very good. The only downside is the relatively small aperture for a fixed prime and the electrical focusing system is a bit wonky to use, but it's definitely spent a lot of time on my camera!

 

The cheap kit zooms I'd skip, the picture quality is very bad compared to similarly priced fixed prime (non-zoom) lenses. The 17-55 mm f/2.8 IS USM lens is the best normal zoom for a crop body, but it's very expensive.

Thanks everybody, you all were really helpful!!

 

I bought a cheap fixed 50 mm (great).

 

I'm hunting for a right priced 18-135 now :3

I have to agree with the others on the 35mm or 50mm primes, although I shoot Sony/Minolta system, the field of view for them is good for this. For me though, 35mm still felt wide on a crop sensor (my 24MP A77), the angle of view of the lens focal length is still wider than the eye, in spite of the narrower field of view of the sensor. 50mm is still closest to the actual angle of view of the human eye, even if the sensor's field of view uses less of it.

 

Of note: My Minolta 35mm F/2.0 cost me a pretty penny ($1400 second hand, as it's an extremely rare and desired lens), and it's age predates the usage of HSM/USM/SSM motors by Minolta in anything aside from large high speed primes and zooms e.g.; 200mm F2.8 or 70-200mm F2.8 and larger. The screw drive focus on it is still snappy fast and accurate though, and the lens optics and natural color can't be beat.

 

All that said, my go to lenses on crop or FF are my 35 F2 and 50 1.4, and on occasion my 85 1.4ZA.