Ron Brown
, Mar 10, 2010; 10:20 p.m.
Can someone please give me an idea of a good lens for my Rebel XTi for around 3 or 4 hundred dollars. I want something that is a good general lens. Something for inside or out, something for portriats or landscapes. I'm not a professional, and I can't really afford much, but I have to get something besides this 18-55. Thanks all.
Steven King
, Mar 10, 2010; 10:29 p.m.
Why?
While it doesn't turn heads and impress people with how much money you can afford to spend, the 18-55 is a very good lens. Rather than invest your money in a replacement for a perfectly usable lens, why not invest instead in a 50mm or a telephoto zoom? They would add to your arsenal rather than simply replace it.
I am a working full-time pro. I never add a piece of gear until I can articulate what the new item will do that I currently cannot accomplish.
Then, instead of collecting cameras and gear, I have can collect memories and photos of the places I've visited.
Good shooting.
Steven
Mark Pierlot
, Mar 10, 2010; 10:32 p.m.
Rob, the best general purpose EF lens for under $400 is without doubt the 50/1.4. It'll be superb on your XTi for portraits, but not nearly wide enough for most landscape shooting. For that, you'll have to go to a wide angle lens, which will put you over your budget. There are some zooms that do a good job with landscapes and portraiture, but these, alas, are also well beyond your budget.
Scott Ferris
, Mar 10, 2010; 10:39 p.m.
Mark,
The 50mm is a superb landscape lens if you use it in portrait orientation and stitch several images together, even hand held the Canon Stitch software does a great job.
Bob Himmelright , Mar 10, 2010; 10:40 p.m.
50mm f1.8 or f1.4
35mm f2
24mm f2.8
Marcus Ian
, Mar 10, 2010; 11:25 p.m.
My first response is a 50 1.4 but a better choice for you might be a pair (since you like to take pictures of everything...:-) ). a 50 1.8 & either a 17-85, or a 28-135 might pair well enough in that budget. You get the advantage of a great cheap 50 (actually 85 on your XTi), plus the range of decent zooms (for your budget at any rate), both zooms have IS, & USM (w/ full time manual focus override).
For general purpose shooting at a non-pro level w/ that budget.... figure a 17-85 or 28-135 (suggested since you already cover 28+ effective WA w/ the 18-55) goes for no more than $300, and a 50/1.8 is about $100...
Nathan Gardner 
, Mar 10, 2010; 11:30 p.m.
used EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM for versatility ($300 or less on ebay) + 50mm f/1.8 II for low light ($100)
Harry Joseph 
, Mar 10, 2010; 11:44 p.m.
The 28-105mm f3.5/4.5 is a very good cheap lens for undre $300 one of my favorites.
Steven F , Mar 10, 2010; 11:45 p.m.
From the B&H catalog (www.bhphotovideo.com).
- 24mm F2.8 $324.95
- 28mm F2.8 $269.95
- 35mm F2.0 $319.95
- 50mm F1.8 $109.95
- 50mm F2.5 Macro (1:2) $299.95, (to go to 1:1 you need a converter sold seperately for $260.00)
- 70-300mm F4-5.6 $200.00
- 100-300mm F4.5-5.6 $295.95
- 55-250mm F4-5.6 IS $255.00
I don't own any of these but adding the 55-250mm IS would be a good addition to your 18.55 giving you coverage from18-250mm. The 50mm F2.5 Macro is reportably quite good and gives you macro capability plus a wider aperture which is useful in low light conditions. The 50mm F1.8 is the cheepest on the list and has the widest aperture.
Steven F , Mar 11, 2010; 12:02 a.m.
Sorry I missed the 28-105 at $199.95. I didn't include the 50 F1.4 because it is $1 short of 400. Add shipping and taxes and it's over $400. My catalog doesn't show the cost of the recently discontinued 17-85 or the cost of it's replacment the 15-85.