The reason for asking is that I want to get a new lens for being able to take closer shots. I don't mean a macro lens, I mean that I want to be able to zoom into shit further away. Understanding that basics will obviously help. I have $250 to spend. From other reading I've done that will only get me a "cheap" lens but I guess it's all relative. Photography is not a hobby of mine but I like to take nice shots when I am away. I have a Canon EOS Digital Rebel if that makes any difference.

Cheers, Max

[ 01-23-2006: Message edited by: Mad Max ]

--------------------

A focal length of 34-102 mm, gives it a zoom range of 3X, as 34 mm multiplied by 3 equals 102 mm.

--------------------

--------------------

--------------------

Knowing it's a DReb helps a LOT. I would recommend a Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 Macro Super 2. It's a very inexpensive lense and gives more than acceptable results. It blows the equivlant canon lens away.

1 thing to consider, particularly with a Digital SLR is that 9 times out of 10 the sensor is smaller than an actual film frame. In short, this means that there is a built-in magnification of your focal length (this isn't exactly how it works, but it's the effective result). You don't notice this because the viewfinder on Digital SLR's is designed to show the actual pixel dimensions of the sensor. This means that the viewfinder is still wysywyg like a Normal SLR. I only mention this because for any lens you purchase, your camera has a built-in teleconverter (telextender). A 70-300mm lens on the DReb translates to a 112-480mm lens, for no extra charge.

The above is only to illustrate a point, what it means is that you get extra zoom for no extra money. You won't ever have to adjust for the crop factor because it's built in to the viewfinder.

To answer your first question, you have to look at focal length, and not the zoom ratio. There is a rough conversion for focal length vs apparent distance from the subject (how far away the subject appears to be in the shot) but I can't remember it offhand. It's something like 300.mm for 2.00metres apparent (for your backwards non-standard american units it's about 76.2inches (30cm) for an apparent 6.50ft)

sigh. . . I've been doing sig-figs all day. . .

[ 01-23-2006: Message edited by: AcidWarp ]

--------------------

“I have noticed even people who claim everything is predestined, and that we can do nothing to change it, look before they cross the road.”

“Intelligence is the ability to adapt to change.”

--------------------

Max, I also found a better way to convert to apparent distance. On a 35mm SLR, the "normal" focal length is 50mm this is because it closely approximates what the human eye sees. So a 300mm lens is 6x the magnification of a 50mm lens. Take that 6x and divide it into the actual distance to subject (most decent lense have a focus distance readout, or you can just approximate it). That will give you a very rough estimate as to how far away the subject will appear to be in the shot. Works for feet or metres.

[ 01-23-2006: Message edited by: AcidWarp ]

--------------------

“I have noticed even people who claim everything is predestined, and that we can do nothing to change it, look before they cross the road.”

“Intelligence is the ability to adapt to change.”

--------------------

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cacophonous:
Max - I think AW answered this for you but the 100-300mm lens, which is still a 3X lens, starts out at 100mm where the 18-55mm starts at only 18mm. A fixed 300mm lens is only 1x.

---

What I REALLY need to do is read a dummies book for photography to understand what all the number mean. I'm typically point and shoot which my camera allows me to do but there is so much more I can do. I will get to that all in good time though.

--------------------

After that, www.photo.net. More tutorials than you'll ever need. Also there are some good books. There's a guide by a guy named John Shaw (his writing strikes me as arrogant, but it is very informative, and the techniques are clearly explained)

--------------------

“I have noticed even people who claim everything is predestined, and that we can do nothing to change it, look before they cross the road.”

“Intelligence is the ability to adapt to change.”

Is this just a general purpose lens or is there something specific you want to shoot? A 300mm lens is plenty for most people, but if you're photographing birds or wildlife, it may not be enough. Or if you're shooting hockey in an arena, you may want a faster lens.

A good source of info for lenses specific to your camera would be the Canon Lens Forum at dpreview.com

--------------------

Thanks, Guys.

[ 01-24-2006: Message edited by: Mad Max ]

--------------------

With a longer lens though, you'll need to use a faster shutter speed than you used with the pandas, so you may need to bump up the ISO on your camera. (You can easily shoot with your camera set to 400; There won't be too much digital noise until you pass 800 ISO.) I'd also recommend shooting with the resolution/quality set to the largest, finest .jpg possible. <--- sorry, is this too much info?

--------------------

*tosses ring at Xan*
*after he "tosses" Xan's ring*

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by crash:
Based on what you've said Max, this lens should be right in your price range and serve you very well. It will allow you to get in nice & tight and let you blur the background so your eye is drawn to the main subject more like this.

With a longer lens though, you'll need to use a faster shutter speed than you used with the pandas, so you may need to bump up the ISO on your camera. (You can easily shoot with your camera set to 400; There won't be too much digital noise until you pass 800 ISO.) I'd also recommend shooting with the resolution/quality set to the largest, finest .jpg possible. <--- sorry, is this too much info?

---

No, not too much info. I understand what you are saying. I always shoot at the highest quality JPG setting. The next step up would be to store photos in raw format but I don't think I need to do that yet.
BTW, how did you blur the background? Did you do it manually or use PS, etc.?

[ 01-24-2006: Message edited by: Mad Max ]

--------------------

I want this one -> http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=106&sort=7&cat=37&page=2

--------------------

“I have noticed even people who claim everything is predestined, and that we can do nothing to change it, look before they cross the road.”

“Intelligence is the ability to adapt to change.”

quote:

---

Originally posted by AcidWarp:
[QB]You blur the background by opening the aperature (increasing f-stop) decreasing depth of field (the distance range of that is in focus). Although, on zoom lenses at the maximum focal length it's a kind of non-issue because they tend to compress the depth of field as the move towards maximum length.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduc t.php?product=18&sort=7&cat=27&page=2showproduct.php?product=18&sort=7&cat=27&page=2

I want this one -> http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=106&sort=7&cat=37&page=2[/ QB]

---

Sorry, AW. I wasn't clear. I meant how did crash blur the background of my photo.

--------------------

--------------------

“I have noticed even people who claim everything is predestined, and that we can do nothing to change it, look before they cross the road.”

“Intelligence is the ability to adapt to change.”

quote:

---

Originally posted by AcidWarp:
Some gaussian blur and the smudge/blur tool? At anyrate, it's probably done in photoshop.

---

I have done that too in PaintShop Pro 5 (one of these days I will upgrade). I was just impressed with the handywork. If it was me the pandas and trees, etc. would be all a blur too.

EDIT: that baby panda's a cutie though, huh?

[ 01-24-2006: Message edited by: Mad Max ]

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by AcidWarp:
Some gaussian blur and the smudge/blur tool? At anyrate, it's probably done in photoshop.

---

Shit, dude knows his Photoshop. Yeah, first I selected out the background, which took friggin' forever. (I stupidly worked on the whole thing and then cropped it later.) I used gaussian blur for most of it. In the areas where I didn't do a good job of selecting, I tried the blur tool but found smudging worked better. (Not great but okay for this little demo.)

And yes, pandas are adorable to begin with, but the baby is uber-cute.

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by AcidWarp:
You blur the background by opening the aperature (increasing f-stop) decreasing depth of field.

---

I understand what you mean, but to be technical, you open or increase the aperture but you decrease the f-stop.

[edit] I just looked at the reviews that AW posted a link to. While I knew that Canon doesn't have a great lens in that range (price and focal length) I wasn't expecting it to get slammed so bad. A Tamron or Sigma might perform better for the money. I've seen a few Tamrons that appear pretty good but I've never thoroughly tested them.

[ 01-25-2006: Message edited by: crash ]

--------------------

The photoshop bit was just a shot in the dark. I only knew that it had been shopped in after I looked close and saw the pinpoints around some of the foreground objects.

Oh, and the 300-800 is because I like to shoot birds and other wildlife.

[ 01-25-2006: Message edited by: AcidWarp ]

--------------------

“I have noticed even people who claim everything is predestined, and that we can do nothing to change it, look before they cross the road.”

“Intelligence is the ability to adapt to change.”

Thanks for the help, guy. MUCH appreciated.

[ 01-28-2006: Message edited by: Mad Max ]

--------------------

--------------------

“I have noticed even people who claim everything is predestined, and that we can do nothing to change it, look before they cross the road.”

“Intelligence is the ability to adapt to change.”

--------------------

I don't know what all that means yet but I know I can take much closer shots.

--------------------

--------------------

“I have noticed even people who claim everything is predestined, and that we can do nothing to change it, look before they cross the road.”

“Intelligence is the ability to adapt to change.”

Top Left - original lens, 18mm
Top Right - orginal lens, 55mm
Bottom Left - new lens, 70mm
Bottom Right - new lens, 300mm

Thanks again for the help.

[ 02-02-2006: Message edited by: Mad Max ]

--------------------

--------------------

“I have noticed even people who claim everything is predestined, and that we can do nothing to change it, look before they cross the road.”

“Intelligence is the ability to adapt to change.”