A&P Best website to learn the meaning of the numbers on different lenses

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by excessive, Aug 23, 2005.

  1. excessive

    excessive New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Charleston SC
    I have found tons of resources for reviews on digital camears.. but what about lenses...?

    What do all the numbers mean for ex:28-105mm 75-300mm 28-90mm

    Any good websites for reference?
     
  2. Ingen

    Ingen New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2005
    Messages:
    7,381
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Teh ohioz0r
    That's the focal length. Small number = wide angle, big number = telephoto. For instance, a 600mm lens will take something really far away and give you a better view, a la telescope. Thus, telephoto. A wide angle lens is, well, wide angle. Fisheye lenses are usually 8-15mm lenses, which is VERY wide.
     
  3. Pitt

    Pitt 1-1-11 — Never Forget OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2003
    Messages:
    150,314
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Injured Reserve
  4. twinturboteddy

    twinturboteddy Bling Bling!

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2000
    Messages:
    1,056
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Gabriel, Ca, USA
    Another thing to keep in mind is something called Field Of View (FOV) crop factor.

    If you are looking at lenses for a film 35mm camera then all the lenses are measured the same way. 300=300.

    But on DSLR camera, the FOV changes because (I think) the sensor is smaller than a 35mm film. So for my E-300 Olympus it has a 2x crop factor. Meaning a 300mm lens on it is the 600mm equivalent on a 35mm.

    On the Canon EOS 1D's there is no crop factor so a 300mm=300mm.

    Hope that helps
     
  5. excessive

    excessive New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Charleston SC
    Thanks for the info guys.

    I am using a Canon 300D, and so far only using the 18-55 lens... but I'm looking for a good general purpose long range , and possibly a general purpose wide-angle lens. So many of them say zoom/wide angle/telephoto, etc. all in the same lens...So confusing.

    For example:
    what are the differneces between these 2 lenses?:

    [​IMG]
    Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 28-90mm f/4.0-5.6 II Autofocus Lens

    [​IMG]
    Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 28-90mm f/4-5.6 USM II Autofocus Lens
     
  6. widebaudi

    widebaudi New Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2001
    Messages:
    845
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    the first one sucks, the 2nd one sucks less because of USM.

    if you want a general purpose wide to tele, then get into something like a 28-300 tamron.
     
  7. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    the second has USM, ultra sonic motor, for faster, quiter auto focus

    on a rebel you have a 1.6 factor you have to times the lens by. so a 10-22mm lens is now a 16-35mm lens.

    you're 18-55mm is actually going to be a 29-88mm. to go wider, you'll need the 10-22 or a 12-24, whcih are a little pricey to most that are just starting. There tons of lenses with decent zoom range on the long end.
     
  8. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do a test though, look through your pictures you've taken, are more taken at the 55mm side or the 18mm side?

    that'll help tell what direction you want to go first
     
  9. kalm823

    kalm823 He who lives on hopes dies of starvation

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Messages:
    2,506
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    usm = ultrasonic motor. USM has has lot faster and a lot quieter focus.
     
  10. excessive

    excessive New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Charleston SC
    so Tamron lenses are just as good as Canon ones? Any other brands that might be cheaper?

    I am looking on bhphotovideo.com
     
  11. excessive

    excessive New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Charleston SC
  12. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    canon is best on a canon, plus the optics are generally better, faster atuofocus, some have image stabilization etc

    sigma is ok, some tamron is ok, you really don't want to venture out beyond that. remember that the lens is what makes the photo, the body just captures it. so if you stick a cheep piece of glass on the camera, you'll get marginal at best results. lenses hold their value a lot better than bodies do, so they are a good investment as far as materisltic things go
     
  13. tenplanescrashing

    tenplanescrashing Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    don't get a 28-300 lens...your optics are going to be averaged throughout the entire range. if you want, get a 28-105 lens for multi-purpose use but i'd get separate lenses to cover the entire range.

    I have a 12-24, 18-70, 70-300 and 50mm prime. I'd stay away from Quantaray lenses but Tokina, Canon & a few Tamron lenses are good. Sigma has a few that are good and some to stay away from.
     
  14. widebaudi

    widebaudi New Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2001
    Messages:
    845
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    dont get a 28-300, but recommend an even crappier lens? the 28-300 fits his general description of some wide and some telephoto more than a 28-105 does. seperate lenses for wide and tele is ideal, but he dosent even know how to read the numbers on the lens let alone tackle more than one lens for his application.
     
  15. SBandit4

    SBandit4 If shit hits the fan, just make sure you have a go

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    5,291
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    You won't go wrong with either canon, tokina,tamron , or sigma lenses, but remember good lenses cost money. With that said, I've read good things about the Tokina ATX 12-24mm F4, but again it won't be cheap at $500. I will probably pick one of these up for my camera once Tokina starts offering a rebate on it or lower the price.
     
  16. jaysian

    jaysian New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2004
    Messages:
    815
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton, Canada
  17. SenenCito

    SenenCito OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 21, 2002
    Messages:
    15,530
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    New York, NY
  18. excessive

    excessive New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Charleston SC
    thanks everyone. I've learned a great deal from the links posted. :run:
     
  19. excessive

    excessive New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Charleston SC
    possibly might get this one for general purpose.. it seems reccomended by many..

    Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM Autofocus Lens USA
    [​IMG]
     
  20. Pineapple Devil

    Pineapple Devil beat it!

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2001
    Messages:
    53,749
    Likes Received:
    8
  21. tenplanescrashing

    tenplanescrashing Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    how is a 28-105 a crappier lens?
     
  22. PitScar

    PitScar Yeah, that's my realtor's name

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2004
    Messages:
    575
    Likes Received:
    0
    No kiddin... maybe crappier in the sense that you have less range, but image quality (depending on the EXACT lens of course) is going to be much improved, unless youre spending several thousand...
     
  23. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating

    4.00/10 4.00/10 5.0/10

    Pros: Cheap
    Cons: Consumer quality


    I was hugely dissapointed with this lens. I bought it as a spur of the moment thing, and will never do that again!

    It is no better or worse than the 18-55 kit lens. I used it only once - and that was enough to tell me that I will never use it again.

    Shots were soft (consumer) across the whole range.


    Pros: Good image quality (for the price), fast focus.
    Cons: Bad construction, No manual fine tune, slow aperture.


    For the price it is an excellent lens, I got excellent results with than, it could have a built better body and to be clearer, it would still improve more revenue.




    Pros: Compact and light
    Cons: Poor image quality, slow speed, no true ring USM, flimsy construction


    Do NOT confuse this lens with the vastly better 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM lens, which beats this lens in all respects - optics, true ring USM and focusing speed and construction. I suspect this lens is probably the successor to the equally inferior 28-90 "pseudo-USM". I tried this in the camera shop where I was hunting for some filters, and they had just got a new batch of the 28-105/4-5.6. When I picked up the lens it felt cheap and crummy like the lowest end 35-80 kit lenses. I put it on the 10D and shot a bit. AF was slow. Images were soft and I couldn't imagine why anyone would buy a lens like this. Of course, it could be that I used a poor sample.



    Low Price. Good zoom range. Good optics quality.
    Cons: Not very wide on DSLR. No image stabilization


    Pros: It's got a good working focal range, compact, light, reasonably sharp and cheap.
    Cons: This lens does not exist! The lens Canon offers is the EF 28-105 3.5-4.5USM! seriously the only down side to this is that it's not the sharpest tool and most samples I've owned displayed fairly strong chromatic abberations beyond the outer 1/4 of the image area.


    What can I say? This is a very good consumer lens that can cover a lot of territory at a very reasonable price! Not an "L" class lens by any stretch of the imagination but a solid, usable piece of glass. I've owned several and sold them only to buy another one!
     

Share This Page