Canon 1000d dSLR

[milkyjoe]

Hello.

I've just purchased the 1000d body ( ) and was wondering if anyone could recommend a good starter lens to go with it as I've read reviews that the supplied kit lens is a bit rubbish; I don't want to spend £100s?

Addendum: I am a complete newbie to dSLRs as I've only ever used compact cameras.

Thanks.

Richard.

[Photosbykev]

I would opt for a fast prime lens. The standard f1.8 50mm lens would be a good choice, it is very sharp and relatively cheap

[milkyjoe]

Hi 'photosbykev',

Thanks for the tips, how cheap are we talking here and can you point me in the right direction as to where I can obtain one please? :-)

Many thanks

Richard.

[jgs001]

Richard, you're talking about £80 from Amazon

Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II Lens

It's a very plastic, very cheap, little lens but has stunning optics and great low light potential. It works nicely for widefield deep sky too... Orion and Auriga just about fit in the FOV.

[Carbon Brush]

Hi. I have two 1000D bodies with various lenses available. I think it is a great camera for daytime & astro use. One is standard, the other has had the IR cut filter removed.

For 'daytime' I use the standard 18-55 (non IS) lens or a Tamron telephoto. Both are autofocus & aperture so allow good results from point & shoot.

For astro use, I have various old non-auto M42 thread lenses with canon/M42 adapter. Obviously these are left wide open and the focus fixed. I would recommend locking the lens focus with chewing gum, blue tack, hose clamp or whatever you find convenient. it is very easy to nudge the focus in the dark.

There are potential problems with old lenses. They are heavy compared to modern lenses. Some of them aren't too good on coatings. But for low cost wide field astro, the performance for ££ spent can be really good.

You can of course hang your camera straight on the scope. The ST102 works well, but the focus is a long way back so you will need an extension tube.

For now, use the camera on full auto in daylight. The various 'clever' modes can be overpowering. The manual is not that well written. Be patient and enjoy the learning. At least you can delete poor pictures and you aren't paying processing charges!

For astro, use the manual mode. Set the mirror to be left up. Set a shutter delay. These steps will ensure the mount has time to stop shaking before taking a picture.

Practice astro photos first in daylight or twilight. That way it will be much easier to find the buttons in the dark.

Good luck with the camera. an excellent choice!

David.

[milkyjoe]

Is this lens image stabilised?

[milkyjoe]

Thanks for your advice David. I can't wait to get going with it.

[russ]

Another really cheap option (one i'm having to explore) for astro use is to buy a M42 adapter for the camera body and then use old M42 lenses. You can buy some absolutely cracking glass for next to nothing.

For instance:

M42 to EOS adapter from Ebay - £4

Prinzflex 135mm F2.8 Telephoto - £4.90 delivered from Ebay

Chinon 35mm F2.8 - £8.10 delivered from Ebay

Prinzflex 200mm F4 - £9.70 delivere from Ebay

I've used the Prinzflex 135mm a couple of times now and its in a completely different league to the Canon 75-300 AFS lens i had. To be honest the Canon 75-300 wasn't much cop but cost (to me) a small fortune. So perhaps not too much of a challenge for the 135mm.

The Canon 'Nifty Fifty' 50mm F1.8 II is a cracking lens. I bought one secondhand for £50 and had some nice results with it (day and night). But decided i could use the £50 to kit myself out with a handful of lenses rather than one.

I kept the 18-55 kit lens for full auto holiday snapping.

[Photosbykev]

for astro work you don't want to use stabilised lens and pretty much all the control functions need to be used on manual. The camera is great in auto for taking typical average snapshots but makes a complete hash of astro images because they are not your average scene.

With very few exceptions old cheap lens with a mount adaptor will not outperform the equivalent modern lens with high quality lens coatings and you will lose the basic lens functions for normal photography

[milkyjoe]

Thanks russ,

I'll have to take your word on those lenses as I know nothing about them, but they certainly are cheap as chips! lol

[russ]

I knew nothing about them either

Hundreds of lenses to choose from on Ebay, i had never heard of most of them. No idea what was good or bad. But i Googled the Prinzflex (remember the old Dixon's own brand stuff from the 80's?) lenses and a lot of the photo forums seemed to like them. They were basically a decent Japanese lens rebadged for Dixon's. Anyhow, the images look half decent, better than what i've been getting from the cheapest Canon/Sigma/Tamron 70-300 zooms.

[Carbon Brush]

Another to throw in for astro use.

If you use a fixed lens (not zoom) you will get better results - all other parameters being equal. Basically the zoom lens has all sorts of compromises on image distortion, field edge sharpness, vignetting, etc. Just how much these compromises affect the image quality depends on lens cost.

I happened to have a few old M42 lenses, so the only cost for trials was the M42/Canon adapter. But for a few quid on ebay, or the car boot sale, or wherever, you can get a few old lenses to play with.

A few images of the moon, bright clusters, etc, will soon let you know whether you have wasted the cost of a few beers. Much better (in my opinion) than throwing

hundreds at posh lenses.

With my cheap lenses, the image quality is usually limited by either the sky, or the (EQ5) mount, or the operator. I think that you have to get good before you need worry about the lens letting you down. Even if a cheap lens is rubbish, it is no great loss.

David.

[Photosbykev]

buy cheap buy twice, buy right buy once springs to mind

I've no problem with experimenting with cheap lens but you will quickly want to get better quality or you will put the camera and lens in the cupboard and never use them again because of the initial disappointment.

I stand by choosing the standard 50mm lens as a good all round quality lens and as 99% of the time you will be using it for normal photography then, to me, it's a no brainer.

[russ]

for astro work you don't want to use stabilised lens and pretty much all the control functions need to be used on manual. The camera is great in auto for taking typical average snapshots but makes a complete hash of astro images because they are not your average scene.

With very few exceptions old cheap lens with a mount adaptor will not outperform the equivalent modern lens with high quality lens coatings and you will lose the basic lens functions for normal photography

I suppose it depends on your budget really. So far the old cheap lenses have proved to be a lot better than the cheap modern zoom equivalent. The Canon 28-80 was awful, the kit 18-55 is not brilliant and all the budget 70-300 are pretty poor too in the grand scheme of things. Yet all cost a pretty packet. And that's the cheap naff stuff. A billion miles from the L class lenses. I think the 50mm F1.8 is brilliant and i whole heartily recommend it but i want more than one prime lens to play with.

I suspect i'm in a minority here as my budget is a pultry £50 for the lenses. And so far my whole DSLR kit (body, remote, CF card, batteries, lenses) has cost £120. I simply cannot afford any more, so the M42 route is my only option.

[Glider]

Isn't there a standard 18-50mm in the For Sale section at this very moment?

[Photosbykev]

I suppose it depends on your budget really. So far the old cheap lenses have proved to be a lot better than the cheap modern zoom equivalent. The Canon 28-80 was awful, the kit 18-55 is not brilliant and all the budget 70-300 are pretty poor too in the grand scheme of things. Yet all cost a pretty packet. And that's the cheap naff stuff. A billion miles from the L class lenses. I think the 50mm F1.8 is brilliant and i whole heartily recommend it but i want more than one prime lens to play with.

I suspect i'm in a minority here as my budget is a pultry £50 for the lenses. And so far my whole DSLR kit (body, remote, CF card, batteries, lenses) has cost £120. I simply cannot afford any more, so the M42 route is my only option.

An old prime lens will generally outperform a budget modern zoom lens under normal conditions, but that's not comparing like for like.

Prime lens can be optimised for performance whereas zooms lens will always be a compromise on performance.

The only modern zoom lens I can think of that will outperform modern prime lens is the Nikon 14-24mm which is unbelievably sharp and very expensive and works beautifully on a Canon 5D MkII lol

Of course if budget is the main factor in choosing your equipment then obviously you get what you can and accept the lower performance.

I've spent well over 30 years building up my stock of camera equipment and yes it is expensive but I did start off with a Canon FTB-1 film camera and the cheapest lens I could find which I thought were brilliant when I first got hold of them but over time you will see them for what they are.

[russ]

Sadly there are no (28mm and 50mm aside) affordable (sub £200) modern prime lenses available. So i can only compare the old primes with modern zooms, not a perfect comparison i know.

Of course if budget is the main factor in choosing your equipment then obviously you get what you can and accept the lower performance.

That really does nail it for me.

[glowjet]

If I remember its not all that many years ago that Hoya were the main glass producers for many of the lens`s on the market, an M42 adapter together with a lens of fixed focal length made by say Tamron, Sigma or Hoya, should give excellent results and be quite cheap to obtain s/hand, however, your first choice should be a standard 50mm f1.8, you can experiment with the others later.

John.

[jgs001]

The older lenses will work nicely for Astro, but, they will be manual focus on the 1000d and that's not gonna make things too easy for you at all. The 50mm (nifty fifty) that Kev and I mentioned, is probably the cheapest option with, autofocus etc. The IS kit lens is meant to be much better than the non IS kit lens, mine works very nicely, and can be had for £99 if you'd prefer a zoom with image stabiliser.

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS Lens

[russ]

Sorry, i think i've got the wrong end of the stick. Is this for daytime use or astro use or a bit of both? I thought we were talking about astro use only....sorry.

I only use the M42 lenses for astro, i have the 18-55 kit lens for daytime. I don't think i would ever bother using the M42's for daytime. Would like to swap the 18-55 for a better walkabout lens but can't afford too. The Canon 18-135 would be perfect for me.

[milkyjoe]

... so, to clarify, I should get the 50mm (basic) prime lens for daytime use as well as the standard 28-55mm kit lens?? As for astro, It was my understanding that you wouldn't use a lens, instead attach the camera body directly to the scope using a t-adapter and then do an exposure... or am I missing something!? lol

[jgs001]

It all depends on what you want to do... You can use a telescope as a daytime lens (not easy, but doable) and you can use camera lenses instead of telescopes..

This was with the 50mm prime

http://stargazerslounge.com/imaging-widefield-special-events-comets/121811-auriga.html

A 50mm prime is a good lens, but you have to work harder to frame your images... no zoom, means you have to walk in and out. So you have to think more about the image. The 18-55 kit lens will do a nice job on really wide FOV images, so Andromeda through Cassiopeia, Perseus and others all in the same image..

What are you wanting to do with the camera ? What sort of images etc ?

[Wobbly Bob]

... so, to clarify, I should get the 50mm (basic) prime lens for daytime use as well as the standard 28-55mm kit lens?? As for astro, It was my understanding that you wouldn't use a lens, instead attach the camera body directly to the scope using a t-adapter and then do an exposure... or am I missing something!? lol

The nifty 50 can be used for daytime and widefield astro images, the kit lens for day time. As for Astro imaging, yes you can mount the camera on a telescope OR use the 50mm along with cheap m42 prime lens's mounted piggy backed on your scope or on a tripod.

[bcheasley]

Have a look at Jerry Lodriguss's Astro photography for beginners he uses the Canon 1000d.

[milkyjoe]

It all depends on what you want to do... You can use a telescope as a daytime lens (not easy, but doable) and you can use camera lenses instead of telescopes..

This was with the 50mm prime

http://stargazerslounge.com/imaging-widefield-special-events-comets/121811-auriga.html

A 50mm prime is a good lens, but you have to work harder to frame your images... no zoom, means you have to walk in and out. So you have to think more about the image. The 18-55 kit lens will do a nice job on really wide FOV images, so Andromeda through Cassiopeia, Perseus and others all in the same image..

What are you wanting to do with the camera ? What sort of images etc ?

Thanks for the info.

I bought the 1000d based on lots of recommendations from this forum actually as it has the most accessories available for astrophotography (Canon I mean). I want to use my 1000d for both daytime use and as a starter camera for some introductory astro work; I was/still am going to buy a t-adapter and attach the camera body to my ST102 and with the added bonus of the 'live view' feature, hopefully this will make focusing a lot easier.

I have only used compact cameras in the past so this is a real step-up in terms of size and functionality as apposed to using a simple point and shoot camera. What annoyed me about compacts was the lack of features and any manual control functions and very short exposure times, I used to have a Panasonic Lumix TZ7, but it was very limited.

I love taking pics of landscapes, sunsets/sunrises etc., and when the stars come out on a lovely clear evening, I always find myself looking up at the heavens and thinking "I would love to take some images of that"; I am very keen and excited about learning basic astrophotography. This is just the first step for me as I've been told this can be a very expensive hobby!

I will need to upgrade my mount and tripod next..

Hope that helps!

Richard.