Canon Lenses

[Nick Parker]

About to go and purchase some new lenes and needed to ask a quick question.

One lens is going to be the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS since i've researched and it to be much better than the original "kit" version.

The other one I am looking at is the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS. Does anybody have any experience with this one? I like the fact that it has IS and a less than $300 price tag.

(Going on a Rebel XT by the way.)

Thanks

 

[Gene Moore]

The lenses you list provide considerable bang for the buck in range, but for storm chasing I would give you a thumbs down. They will be much too slow for under the cloud base photography and you'll have to make up for it by increasing the ISO, maybe as high as 400. Better to look for lenses in the range of F-stops under F 4.0. I try to have lenses of 2.8 or faster. Very wide angle lenses can be slower because the field of view dampens movement, but the telephotos need to be faster. You'll want to keep your shooting speed near or above 125/sec to keep the images from being blurred by movement. I realize IS is a factor, but I think 5.6 is still too high......other opiniions?

 

[Brandon Goforth]

Better to look for lenses in the range of F-stops under F 4.0. I try to have lenses of 2.8 or faster. Very wide angle lenses can be slower because the field of view dampens movement, but the telephotos need to be faster. You'll want to keep your shooting speed near or above 125/sec to keep the images from being blurred by movement. I realize IS is a factor, but I think 5.6 is still too high......other opiniions?

True if you're hand holding everything. With fast moving storms you're pretty much forced into hand holding everything because there's really no time to pull out a tripod. If you're using a tripod, slower shutter speeds due to lower lighting really isn't too big of a deal. 1/20 of a second, or even as slow as 1/10 or 1/8 at certain times, is still fast enough to keep things sharp if using a tripod.

 

[Aaron Kennedy]

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS .... got this for my wife. Obviously not an L lens, but good bang for the buck as you said. I think it work adequately for storm chasing, especially at the wide end where it is f/3.5. The only down point is @55mm... it loses its crispness there so I treat it as an 18-50mm lens.

 

[Eric Treece]

One thing to take into consideration, and it doesn't really matter what lens you are using, if you are shooting at 3.5/f you are going to lose some of your depth of field making focusing really important on the subject. If you can shoot at say 8/f or even 11/f you are going to increase your depth of field and focusing is less likely to become an issue, but like Gene said, you are shooting under a dark cloud base and the later in the evening the more you have to open up to let the light hit the sensor in either shutter speed or f/stop. The IS definitely helps if you are shooting on the fly keeping things pretty sharp. If you can brace yourself shooting even a little, I have taken crisp shots freehand at 1/20 Shutter speed. One other tip, if you use autofire and shoot say 3 or 4 images in succession, you have better odds of getting a clearer picture in one of the latter shots. Generally the first picture taken in the rapid fire will be blurry because you are pressing the trigger and that little movement will cause a substantial about of blur.

 

[Melanie Kern-Favilla]

I think the more important question is what are you going to use the lenses for, primarily? If you're going to be doing a lot of chasing, may I suggest the Canon 10-22mm f3/5-4.5. You can get more info on it here:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-10-22mm-f-3.5-4.5-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

I absolutely love this lens. It's a little pricey, but well worth it, IMO. I think there are some heavy-duty chasers on this forum that use this lens; They can probably give more feedback. I think Mike Hollingshead uses it, if I'm not mistaken.

Good luck with your purchase!

Melanie

 

[Aaron Kennedy]

On a super-wide note, I went with the Tokina 12-24mm f/4 which is ~$150-200 cheaper than the Canon. Other than some chromatic abberation in the corners (easily corrected using various programs), it's a great lens and in my opinion, the build quality is superior to the Canon equivalent.

From the other day:

 

[Greg Blumberg]

I have a question for the Canon Lens audience. I purchased a Canon XT with the kit lens a while back in February (my mistake for the kit lens). I also received an old telephoto from my dad. So that makes the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens and a 70-210mm f/4 that I currently have.

I'm disappointed in the 18-55mm and am looking to replace it in the future. Any suggestions? I've looked at the Sigma 17-70mm, the Canon 17-40mm L, the Canon 10-22mm, and some other lenses. Anyone know about how these preform in storm chasing? I'm looking for ideas for my next purchase.

 

[Nick Parker]

The lenses you list provide considerable bang for the buck in range, but for storm chasing I would give you a thumbs down.

Thanks for all the info folks. Very helpful stuff.

Gene, im mostly going to use the 18-55 with IS in the "heated" storm chasing role. The 55-250 will just be a all around zoom. End up using it mostly around for other things or sitting out in the middle of a field on a tripod shooting some long-range weather. Hopefully I can be close enough to a storm to NOT have to use the zoom lens except for when she's coming in on my target area.

Thanks again for all the info!

Nick

 

[Mike Hollingshead]

I have a question for the Canon Lens audience. I purchased a Canon XT with the kit lens a while back in February (my mistake for the kit lens). I also received an old telephoto from my dad. So that makes the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens and a 70-210mm f/4 that I currently have.

I'm disappointed in the 18-55mm and am looking to replace it in the future. Any suggestions? I've looked at the Sigma 17-70mm, the Canon 17-40mm L, the Canon 10-22mm, and some other lenses. Anyone know about how these preform in storm chasing? I'm looking for ideas for my next purchase.

I own both the canons, and the 10-22 is on my camera 99% of the time when chasing. I now only use the 17-40L if I'm trying to shoot close lightning, and even then I'm tempted to use the 10-22 for super close bolt shots. Far off lightning doesn't thrill me much for some reason. I could likely live without my 17-40, but not the 10-22. It's just really impossible to be too close for structure when you are at 10mm. So if you like structure and want to be in closer for any tornadoes, you're rather set. To get the same view with 17mm you have to drive a few miles east each time. The 10-22 is a hair sharper than my 17-40L too, but my 17-40L is a pretty sharp copy. I'd say the 10-22 clearly beats it in contrast though.

 

[Nick Parker]

Hey Mike...while i've got you here.

Where do you find those window mounts you talk so highly of??? Im quite lazy (hah) and these sound like a pretty sweet little deal.

 

[Mike Hollingshead]

I'm sure you can get them at hbphotovideo.com somewhere on there, otherwise I imagine most bigger camera stores will have them. The two I got were purchased from Rockbrook camera in Omaha. I think they were $25 each, both times I got them. It's nice to have one for video and one for still. No need to ever stand out in the lightning with them. (*to head off any threads....yes I realize it's possible for lightning to still get you anyway*)

 

[Nick Parker]

(*to head off any threads....yes I realize it's possible for lightning to still get you anyway*)

Nooo...your safe in your rubber tire vehicle....My M2 Bradley is steel tracked so im screwed....

Thanks. Amazing i've looked and never seem them. Must just be me....

 

[Aaron Kennedy]

The 10-22 is a hair sharper than my 17-40L too, but my 17-40L is a pretty sharp copy.

I swear lenses are like buying cars... My 17-40L which I consider a mediocre copy hands down beat out a 10-22 I tried it against. Go figure... Compared to my 12-24, I'd say the 17-40 is identical in the center, but slightly better at the borders (except for the one corner) @ 17mm. 17-40 has better contrast and lens flare control. Of course in the end it doesn't matter... both lenses produce publishable results.

 

[D. Hayes]

I was thinking of just renting a few lenses over time and see what I really like. Any one here have any experience doing this? I'm not sure if it was this forum or another but if anyone has any recommendations for where to rent, please tell.