Lenses

>>3128421
Have you considered Ebay?

>be MFTard
>only have 2 native lenses, 14-140mm 3.5-5.6 kitlens (600 Euroshekels on its own) and the cheap-as-shit 25mm 1.7 (170 Euroshekels)
>the 25mm 1.7 is made out of plastic but with a metal mount and a very solid feel to it and almost perfect edge-to-edge sharpness
>look at some Canon And Nikon DSLRs on the showfloor of an electonrics store
>see a nikon 3300 with some kitlens
>wanna check it out
>can't find the fucking focus ring
>there's only one ring and it zooms
>notice the front element has ridges around the edge
>in disbelief, reach forward
>touch the front ring
>"no, it can't be"
>twist the front element
>it focuses
>the fucking front element focuses
>you couldn't even use a fucking CPL on this POS
>the front element slightly rattles in its place

tl;dr it depends on manufacturer and system.
Also, use the /gear/thread

>>3128437
Considered, but I wouldn't know what lens to look for.

>>3128443
To be honest re-reading your post made me question what you're even asking.

>>3128421
Just get the cheap Canon. L series are too expensive. Otherwise the only good 3rd parties wide zooms:
Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 (constant f/3.5 but expensive)
Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 (also more expensive but wider)
There's also two Tokinas at 11/12mm for widest area but are more expensive. They are f/2.8 and f/4 though.

>>3128421
>Are the cheaper lenses even worth buying?
Yes. Many cheap lenses are very good. Look at the properties of the lens before the cost.

Sigma 10-20 or the Tamron. This should be in the gear thread btw.

>>3128421
Are you in switzerland?

>>3128421
look for lens reviews online, you can even find good comparisons on youtube with numerous example shots, distortion analysis and whatnot.

if you have found one you want to try just order online so you can return it if you dont enjoy it.

>>3128421
The EFS10-18 is a very good choice unless you need moar aperture than f4.5-5.6.

My kit lens gave up on me, every time I use it it offers me an error (I'm forgetful but it's something about the connectors) - and I know kit lenses are usually shit anyway but I'm not rich, and I'm very much a beginner.

For my next lens I was considering wide angle lenses because most of what I do is landscape tbqh. But I also take snapshits of my dog which would probably be distorted by a wide angle. Anyone got any suggestions for a relatively cheap wide-angle lens for a canon?

The ef-s 10-18 is alright. It's a lot lighter than any alternative. I use it on my travel camera, a 100d. Also, I don't like to carry any expensive equipment to the places I visit. It should be lightweight as well. Image quality is still decent. You get what you pay for. But with Canon that is still a lot more than what the competition offers.

File: highres-Canon-EF-S-24mm-STM-5_1421068765.jpg (2MB, 2081x2079px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2081x2079px

>>3129722
>>3130898
90% of the time I keep pic related on my 100D. It's decent and the camera is very compact with that lens.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera Model	E-M5
Camera Software	Version 2.0
Photographer	Picasa
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2015:01:12 13:18:58
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/14.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	45.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2081
Image Height	2079
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Unique Image ID	9c11145914b25bfa780105e6e484c695

File: lents.png (166KB, 800x440px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 800x440px

I've got pic related coming in the mail. I feel no personal shame or guilt about this, but I must keep it a secret, or I will lose my job on security grounds.

is there any point in buying fast lenses, other than the optical quality as a result of construction, if you want a large depth of field anyway (for me, I want to take cityscape shots). I figure I'd be shooting at f/8 + anyway.

Tokina 11-16 2.8 can find used for the cost of the 10-18 new and is over a stop faster, better build, 77mm filter and stomps most UWA in IQ

>>3131167
>It's a "Sugar try to resell its buyer remorse lens" episode

>>3131131
A fast lens is nice to have but rarely necessary. You can satisfy your occasional cravings w a cheap 1.8/50 or adapted vintage prime or three.

File: 1459131175142.jpg (23KB, 337x367px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 337x367px

>>3131259

u w0t m8? I have the Tokina and love it, it's the only reason I still have my d7000

>1826+191
>taking advice about lenses from people who don't own them

I shiggy diggy rest in peace biggy my niggy

>>3131259
Let me tell you about the Tokina 11-16, shithead. Its fucking great.

>>3128421
get sigma 18-35.

File: peehole lens.png (612KB, 499x1000px) Image search: [Google]

612KB, 499x1000px

what does /pee/ think of pinhole lenses? they seem somewhat useless except for dramatic (almost macro) closeups

File: 0557.jpg (400KB, 1500x1101px) Image search: [Google]

400KB, 1500x1101px

>>3133381
Purchase a $2 cap, drill a hole and tape a piece of foil w pinhole on it. Its worth trying once just to see how useless it is. If you want to actually try pinhole for real you get much better results with a tin can or shoebox and photo paper.

File: IMGP1285.jpg (158KB, 1000x662px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1000x662px

>>3131113
Not bad †bh

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	PENTAX
Camera Model	PENTAX K-50
Camera Software	ArcSoft PhotoStudio
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	52 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Pixel Composition	Unknown
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:08:18 16:32:29
Exposure Time	1/180 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	Flash
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2048
Image Height	1355
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

File: 20170709-7433.jpg (579KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

579KB, 1500x1000px

>>3128421
That lens is great and very affordable. Buy used and it's an even better deal. The mount is plastic and it is a lightweight lens, but optically it's better than the majority of canon's other offerings in that FOV range. I did some research before picking mine up and from what I found the next step up is significantly more expensive. Also it has IS so video looks great. I shoot mostly still but it is nice to be able to record video.

It is a slow lens, but what do you need DOF on a wide angle for anyway? Short focal length + IS means low light isn't much of a problem. As a bonus, it's got Canon written on it so it's easy to resell if you change your mind or want to upgrade.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS REBEL T5i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.12 (Macintosh)
Photographer	Michael Sutherland
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:08:19 17:21:18
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	13.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3131113
fuck i wanna watch clue now

File: hi_five_meh.png (20KB, 493x402px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 493x402px

>>3135734
well spotted anon

So what do people feel about Tamron, I've never really been on /p/ so I just wanna see what people think.

Been thinking about buying their 2.8 70-300 over the canon 70-300 for my Canon T5i. Honestly was trying to save a $1000 bucks, but still have a nice telephoto

>>3137815
i only saw the 17-50 f2.8 and all I could say was that it had a really noisy motor

>>3128437
pls

for those of you who don't use lense hoods, how do you protect your zoom lenses from bumping into random stuff while shooting on the street like people incoming or doors?

do you guys put lens caps on after shooting? I feel like I'm really paranoid

File: personalspace5.png (217KB, 400x268px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 400x268px

>>3137914
personal space protector m8

Panasonic 14mm 2.5 vs Olympus 17mm 2.8 vs Sigma 19mm 2.8

Which one?! I HATE HAVING SO MUCH CHOICE

>>3129469
> Switzerland
> Euroshekels

no

should I sell my nikon 18-55 f3.5-5.6 af-p kit lens and 35mm f1.8 lens for a sigma 17-50 f2.8 lens?

>>3128441
Kitlens Nikkors are a joke, even Canon and Sony, the only thing good you can get are the 18-105 or 18-115. Image quality wise the Nikkor is good but on all brands, the build is simply a joke.
>And I even do video and short movies with one of them :^)

I'm looking for a portrait lens and I'm torn between 85 1.8G or Tokina 100 2.8 (dual purpose since it can be portrait and macro)

Anyone care to give me their take on what may be the best choice? Just looking for second opinions

>>3138207
no

File: 1503328707637.jpg (12KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 480x640px

>11-16mm 2.8
>18-35mm 1.8
>50-100mm 1.8

Is there a focal length I'm sorely missing from my collection? These are the only lenses I own.

>>3139167
I just have the 18-55 that came with my camera, looking to get something like a 70-300 for various outdoors uses.

I'm interested in getting a 50mm lens but want a vintage lens for budget reasons. Which manufacturer should I be looking for? Right now I'm looking at a pentax smc 50mm f2 for 20 bucks. With a ~10 adapter that's probably the best I could do for under 50 right?

>>3139581
I'd suggest a SMC-Pentax 1.7. Its cheap too and ridiculously sharp.