If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Canon 300D kit lens colours
Hi,
I recently replaced the kit lens on my 300D with a Sigma 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5. One thing I immiediately noticed is that the colours are now more vivid and *colourful* Anyone else here who moved to the Sigma 24-135mm from the Canon kit lens and noticed something similar? - Siddhartha |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
In article .com,
"Siddhartha Jain" wrote: Hi, I recently replaced the kit lens on my 300D with a Sigma 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5. One thing I immiediately noticed is that the colours are now more vivid and *colourful* Anyone else here who moved to the Sigma 24-135mm from the Canon kit lens and noticed something similar? - Siddhartha The 18-55mm kit lens is very poor. Most lenses are a big improvement. Add a hood to get even cleaner color (less grey haze). |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
In article .com, "Siddhartha Jain" wrote: Hi, I recently replaced the kit lens on my 300D with a Sigma 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5. One thing I immiediately noticed is that the colours are now more vivid and *colourful* Anyone else here who moved to the Sigma 24-135mm from the Canon kit lens and noticed something similar? - Siddhartha The 18-55mm kit lens is very poor. Most lenses are a big improvement. Add a hood to get even cleaner color (less grey haze). Please comment on the quality of these "kit lens" photos: http://www.fototime.com/DE8DD65B8DB8087/orig.jpg http://www.fototime.com/0DBE26779B62704/orig.jpg http://www.fototime.com/5DC4BAE5B4F82BA/orig.jpg http://www.fototime.com/02F7F893884157A/orig.jpg http://www.fototime.com/55DA1C3096F2952/orig.jpg -- Frank ess |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Frank ess" wrote: Kevin McMurtrie wrote: In article .com, "Siddhartha Jain" wrote: Hi, I recently replaced the kit lens on my 300D with a Sigma 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5. One thing I immiediately noticed is that the colours are now more vivid and *colourful* Anyone else here who moved to the Sigma 24-135mm from the Canon kit lens and noticed something similar? - Siddhartha The 18-55mm kit lens is very poor. Most lenses are a big improvement. Add a hood to get even cleaner color (less grey haze). Please comment on the quality of these "kit lens" photos: http://www.fototime.com/DE8DD65B8DB8087/orig.jpg http://www.fototime.com/0DBE26779B62704/orig.jpg http://www.fototime.com/5DC4BAE5B4F82BA/orig.jpg http://www.fototime.com/02F7F893884157A/orig.jpg http://www.fototime.com/55DA1C3096F2952/orig.jpg I've seen those before. The subjects are very high contrast and the photos are downsampled. It's hardly a good test of a lens that has problems with low contrast and low sharpness. The kit lens is very usable. You can crank up in-camera sharpening and contrast and set the aperture to F/8 to get good photos. It doesn't leave much adjustment headroom for difficult shooting conditions. Might as well get a point'n'shoot because they take great photos under perfect conditions too. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Siddhartha Jain wrote:
Hi, I recently replaced the kit lens on my 300D with a Sigma 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5. One thing I immiediately noticed is that the colours are now more vivid and *colourful* Anyone else here who moved to the Sigma 24-135mm from the Canon kit lens and noticed something similar? - Siddhartha The Pop Photo May issue says the kit lens is "terrific" - if that means anything, with those color-coded lens reviews that rival the new Food Pyramid in ambiguity. I just picked up a DRebel (pristine refurb for $599 delivered BTW - in case anyone wonders why anyone would, now that the XT is here), and the lens seems OK, but a little flat - perhaps the Sigma just has more contrast. Speaking of Pop Photo - Tokina's advertising that 12-24 so much, you'd swear it was available. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Bob(but not that Bob)" wrote in message ... Siddhartha Jain wrote: Hi, I recently replaced the kit lens on my 300D with a Sigma 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5. One thing I immiediately noticed is that the colours are now more vivid and *colourful* Anyone else here who moved to the Sigma 24-135mm from the Canon kit lens and noticed something similar? - Siddhartha The Pop Photo May issue says the kit lens is "terrific" - if that means anything, with those color-coded lens reviews that rival the new Food Pyramid in ambiguity. I just picked up a DRebel (pristine refurb for $599 delivered BTW - in case anyone wonders why anyone would, now that the XT is here), and the lens seems OK, but a little flat - perhaps the Sigma just has more contrast. Speaking of Pop Photo - Tokina's advertising that 12-24 so much, you'd swear it was available. where can u get refurbs?? Thanks. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Dirty Harry wrote:
"Bob(but not that Bob)" wrote in message ... Siddhartha Jain wrote: Hi, I recently replaced the kit lens on my 300D with a Sigma 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5. One thing I immiediately noticed is that the colours are now more vivid and *colourful* Anyone else here who moved to the Sigma 24-135mm from the Canon kit lens and noticed something similar? - Siddhartha The Pop Photo May issue says the kit lens is "terrific" - if that means anything, with those color-coded lens reviews that rival the new Food Pyramid in ambiguity. I just picked up a DRebel (pristine refurb for $599 delivered BTW - in case anyone wonders why anyone would, now that the XT is here), and the lens seems OK, but a little flat - perhaps the Sigma just has more contrast. Speaking of Pop Photo - Tokina's advertising that 12-24 so much, you'd swear it was available. where can u get refurbs?? Thanks. National Camera ( http://www.natcam.com ) had some on eBay - they went pretty fast - don't know if they are getting more. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Bob(but not that Bob) wrote:
The Pop Photo May issue says the kit lens is "terrific" - if that means anything, with those color-coded lens reviews that rival the new Food Pyramid in ambiguity. I just picked up a DRebel (pristine refurb for $599 delivered BTW - in case anyone wonders why anyone would, now that the XT is here), and the lens seems OK, but a little flat - perhaps the Sigma just has more contrast. Speaking of Pop Photo - Tokina's advertising that 12-24 so much, you'd swear it was available. Pop Photo very rarely rates anything poorly so anything that they say should be taken with a huge grain of salt. Yep, been seeing those ads from Tokina. Looks like its selling like hot cakes - backordered on B&H and Adorama. - Siddhartha |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Frank ess wrote: Please comment on the quality of these "kit lens" photos: Not bad at all, but surely you can understand why the 18-55 is a disappointing lens. It's build quality and feel, just don't put it in the "fine piece of equipment" category. It does get the job done, and I've enjoyed using it at the 18mm setting. But it just feels like a crummy lens. Does your focus ring move? Even with the mirror locked up, and the camera on a tripod, I'm sure that front element is vibrating. Yuck. I'm not saying I can measure the aberration from that effect, bit it can't be a good thing. Now, the lens I upgraded to probably isn't much better, and may not even be as good in certain respects (Tamron 28-200XR F3.8), but it certainly feels better to my hands. I'm sure I'll be investing in lenses, but I need to recover from buying this 20D, which is way more camera than I need, and ouch!, but I love it, no remorse at all! I'm going to a place in May that's worthy of photographs, and I wanted to have a good camera for the trip. The kit lens and the Tamron should get me through the summer. (They have to, or else I'd have to go back to film.) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Bob(but not that Bob) wrote: The Pop Photo May issue says the kit lens is "terrific" Good Lord, really? Nobody who has ever held a Hasselblad or even a Zeiss lens in his hand will ever dub the 18-55 kit lens as "terriffic." I mean, the lens has a front focusing element that visibly moves from the shutter vibration! It *feels* like junk. If the optics are good, it's a waste of good glass to be in this poor a mechanism. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Questions on Canon 300D and etc. questions regarding digitalphotography | Matt Ion | Digital Photography | 3 | March 24th 05 02:57 PM |
Zoom lens for Canon 300D - Tamron/Canon | Siddhartha Jain | Digital SLR Cameras | 13 | January 16th 05 04:35 PM |
Best telephoto zoom lens for canon 300D | R | Digital Photography | 12 | December 2nd 04 08:05 PM |
CANON - The Great Innovator (was: CANON – The Great Pretender) | Steven M. Scharf | Digital Photography | 104 | September 3rd 04 01:01 PM |
Good lens to buy for canon eos 300d? | Joe Price | 35mm Photo Equipment | 23 | August 15th 04 10:08 PM |