# Lens for 50D?



## Tasneem (Apr 10, 2011)

Hello,

I bought a second-hand 50D body today, What is the best lens (under $550)?
I want a multi purpose lense.

And if you please tell me what memory cards works best with this camea?

Thanks


----------



## Admin US West (Apr 10, 2011)

Any compact flash will work with the camera. Just pickup a couple of inexpensive 8 GB compact flash cards, and you will be fine. You won't need the latest and greatest, they will not work faster in your camera.

for example 

http://www.adorama.com/ILXCF8GB2P2.html

As for lens, that is the most important part, much more important than the body selection. Many spend several times the cost of the body on lenses.

However, for under $500, I'd buy the 18-55mm IS and the 55-250mm IS. If money allows, add the bargain priced 50mm f/1.8. At some point, you will want to move up to the big $$$ lenses, but wait for a couple of years.

Good Luck.


----------



## 87vr6 (Apr 10, 2011)

Either of these would be a nice addition:


17-85 for a decent wide to short tele
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-17-85mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

or a normal to medium tele:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-28-135mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx


----------



## fotografiasi (Apr 11, 2011)

My recommendation for you is to get the Canon 28 1.8. It's 530$. You'll not regret the choice. The next step is the Canon 85 1.8. Don't waste your money on that zooms. Latter when you'll move to full frame those lenses would still work and will smooth the transition. Doing it in this way the lost money in the process will be most minimized, but most important is the skill you will develop


----------



## Tasneem (Apr 11, 2011)

Thank you all... helpful replies.

I decided to by one of the following lenses: (still confused :-\)
Canon EF-S 15-85mm
Canon EF 50mm f1.4 USM
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

I'll get only one lens now, then additional lens every 6-9 months.


----------



## HughHowey (Apr 11, 2011)

If you can only get one, I'd get the 15-85. As much as I shy away from zooms and EF-S lenses, this one is killer. It feels a lot like my L lenses; I think Canon just doesn't want to call any EF-S lenses 'L' for understandable reasons. The IQ is incredible. I do recommend a hood for wide angle shots; if you're not careful, you'll get some flaring. But this is my go-to walk around lens for outdoor shooting.


----------



## lol (Apr 11, 2011)

The 15-85 is a nice general purpose lens, but if budget is that tight I'd suggest also looking at the older 17-85, particularly if you can find a used model to get the price down further. The other two primes have their uses but you may find them limiting in scope as an only lens.


----------



## gary (Apr 11, 2011)

I have a 50d and use an 85 1.8. Its great value for money, very good IQ. I also have the 50 1.4 and its also a winner. I would avoid the EFS lens as should you decide to upgrade to a FF then they are of no use.


----------



## unfocused (Apr 11, 2011)

> If you can only get one, I'd get the 15-85.



I agree. This is a great lens and it is the one that is on my 7D about 90% of the time. The extra 2mm at the wide end really is a big deal. It is very solid and extremely sharp. Some people don't like it because it is a little slow and yes, I do wish it were a 2.8 but as a reasonably-priced all-around lens it can't be beat.

If you are in the US, I note that the Canon Store currently has a refurbished one in stock. 

One bit of advice though, be sure and pay the extra for the thin filters designed for wide-angle lenses. At the wide end, you can get some vignetting with a standard filter.


----------



## IWLP (Apr 11, 2011)

One thing I would add is primes are great, but you still need to consider _your_ favorite focal length(s) when purchasing one. 

The 50mm f/1.8 is certainly a nice lens, but on a 1.6x-crop body, I really don't like the field of view. However, something in the range of 22-24mm is quite useful. Of course, the next guy might love 50mm on the same body, but have no use for a 24mm prime.

If you already know the focal lengths you want, great, but I wouldn't want to see someone spend good money on lenses, only to figure out a certain focal length feels too tight or loose for their personal shooting style and preference.

$.02


----------



## tomscott (Apr 11, 2011)

Primes are great, but much more specific than zooms. Especially if you have no other lenses which it sounds like in this case. So i think the last thing i would recommend is a prime. You are very limited with a prime, I would say get a good zoom to start with like the 17-55mm F2.8 then get a tele, so you are covering a good range then start looking at primes for more specific shooting. I have just started getting into primes after about 5 years of using zooms, and i have to say i love them and loath them, i love the flexibility of a zoom lens, but prefer the quality of the prime. But im not selling my work to national geographic so i think i can deal with the quality not being as good.

Tom Scott


----------



## 87vr6 (Apr 11, 2011)

I love how this guys set out very specific guidelines to what he needed/wanted and everyone pretty much did not follow them whatsoever...

Everyone suggested primes (for the most part), those meet the price aspect, but definitely not the multipurpose requirement.

the 17-55 is 1000+, a far cry from the 550...

Again, read up on this 17-85, which is right at your price limit:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/17-85-is.htm
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-17-85mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

The 15-85 is viable too, but a few hundred out of your stated range:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-15-85mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

And for a longer range and still good IQ, the EF28-135, not the EFS. This is the lens I'd recommend the most to you, based on your specifications. 
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/28-135mm.htm
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-28-135mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

And don't be afraid to buy refurbished stuff. All of my equipment was purchased lightly used or refurb'd, and obviously I saved a fair amount of cash!

To buy:
http://www.adorama.com/searchsite/default.aspx?searchinfo=Canon+28-135mm+IS+

http://www.adorama.com/SearchSite/Default.aspx?searchinfo=Canon%20EF-S%2015-85mm%20f/3.5-5.6%20IS%20USM%20

http://www.adorama.com/SearchSite/Default.aspx?searchinfo=Canon%20EF-S%2017-85mm


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 11, 2011)

Interestingly, no one has suggested 3rd party lenses. I haven't used one, but reportedly the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 non-VC is an excellent lens (optically better than the VC version). AF is supposedly loud and a bit slow, but it's otherwise a great value - fast aperture (for a zoom), good general purpose focal length on a crop body, and the price is right...


----------



## unfocused (Apr 11, 2011)

> I love how this guys set out very specific guidelines to what he needed/wanted and everyone pretty much did not follow them whatsoever...



True...sort of.

In his second post, the OP says he is trying to decide between three lenses: 

Canon EF-S 15-85mm
Canon EF 50mm f1.4 USM
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

With those three as his choices, I recommended the EF-S 15-85. 

Why not the EF-S 17-85?

I don't have any experience with that lens and it's not on his list, but the DP Review of the 15-85 does make me think it's a better choice.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-15-85mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx



> While the Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Lens and the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens seem similar in specs and even appearance, the 15-85 is a significant upgrade in image quality.



and



> The 17-85 is still a decent lens. But, I highly recommend the Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Lens over the 17-85.



Yes, it is the most expensive of the three the original poster is picking from, but it's the most versatile and is the best all-around lens.


----------



## 87vr6 (Apr 11, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> Interestingly, no one has suggested 3rd party lenses. I haven't used one, but reportedly the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 non-VC is an excellent lens (optically better than the VC version). AF is supposedly loud and a bit slow, but it's otherwise a great value - fast aperture (for a zoom), good general purpose focal length on a crop body, and the price is right...



Me personally, I am not a fan of 3rd party for the most part. And I also come with the school of thought that even mild zooms should have some form of IS (tamron's VC). I tried taking some rolling shots of cars with my 17-40 and most came out blurry due to the slower shutter speeds (1/50-1/60) in order to induce motion blur to the background and wheels. Trying the same shots with the 24-105 with IS resulted in perfect shots, even down to 1/40 and 1/30.


----------



## Freshprince08 (Apr 11, 2011)

I have the 17-55, 15-85, 50 1.8, 85 1.8 (and the Sigma 50 1.4), used on a 7D and 500D (T1i). So I can speak with some first hand experience...

The primes all deliver awesome IQ - in terms of a price/performance ratio I think they win hands down. For the price, the 50 1.8 is a must have I think (however the bokeh on that lens is harsh, whereas the Sigma's is buttery!).

The OP did mention "multi-purpose", so in that sense a zoom would seem most appropriate. The 17-55 delivers L lens IQ but is out of the price range suggested. I've not used the 17-85 mentioned in some replies, however by all accounts the 15-85 is sharper/more contrasty/less distortion, and 2mm wider (significant). The IQ on this lens is awesome for the price. It IS too slow for indoor use/shallow DOF however. 

If your work is predominantly outdoors (or you can use off camera flash indoors) then I can highly recommend the 15-85.

If you shoot indoors mostly then I'd consider a prime if you can find one that fits your focal length requirements... even a f2.8 zoom can be too slow without ISO 1600/3200!


----------



## tomscott (Apr 11, 2011)

I had the 17-85mm and although a great focal length... a pretty poor lens. It had chromatic aberration all over the place! distortion, vignette at the extreams, wasnt sharp, slow and in the end it had the dreaded cable IS problem that plagued it. Where excessive use of the lens frayed one of the cables leading to error1 at F4 under 24mm and basically nakard IS.

I have to say tho it was a good lens in practice and all of those problems were solved post processing, especialy with the new raw lens fix on any of the new PS, LR or elements programs. I do shoot alot, that thing was on me everywhere for 3 years (without too much care) with more than 100k pics so i suppose thats the reason it broke. But since buying the 17-55 you know where your money goes, it is a sublime lens. I just miss the focal length of the 17-85, but optically far superior.

They seem to have solved these problems with the new 15-85mm, so in my opinion that is the one to buy, it maybe alittle more but worth it! Good compromise unless you are shooting alot of low light conditions. Otherwise it is a great all purpose lens.


----------

