switching camera lenses

spacerobot

Hello everyone,
This summer I purchased a Canon Rebel XT with kit lens http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Digital-Rebel-XT-f3-5-5-6/dp/B0007QKN22/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-1744880-2850452?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1189653204&sr=1-1. It's an excellent camera and I have no complaints about it. I've enjoyed using it so much that I signed up for a photography class (which met for the first time today). The professor of the class announced that we need a 35mm camera for the class... we will be shooting with slide projector film, which of course doesnt mix with a digital camera. This class seems really really interesting so i want to stick with it... which would mean purchasing a 35mm camera. It appears i can buy a Canon Rebel 35mm body on amazon for $135.00 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0000CCSDS/sr=8-1/qid=1189652807/ref=noref/002-1744880-2850452?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1189652807&sr=8-1 (plus probably overnight shipping so I can bring it to the next class).

So my question is, will the lens of my Rebel XT be compatible with the body of the 35mm? Thanks!

oh, and is the Rebel 35mm a decent camera for 135 bucks? I'm just considering it as an expensive textbook.

arod_77

No--sadly the K2/T2 won't mount "EF-S" lenses like that kit lense--just regular canon "EF" lenses


If you want a nice starter lense that will fit on both--look at this

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/12142-USA/Canon_2514A002_Normal_EF_50mm_f_1_8.html#goto_itemInfo

spacerobot

arod_77 wrote: »

No--sadly the K2/T2 won't mount "EF-S" lenses like that kit lense--just regular canon "EF" lenses


If you want a nice starter lense that will fit on both--look at this

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/12142-USA/Canon_2514A002_Normal_EF_50mm_f_1_8.html#goto_itemInfo

I assume that lens is significantly better than the kit lens that comes with the K2 (the whole kit is $183.00)? Which would be a better deal because I could use that lens on both cameras. Which leads me to another question, I'm not familiar with B&H, think that lens could be shipped to the Chicago area by next Wednesday? Right now the website says they wont resume shipping until "Saturady" [sic] And I need the camera to be ready by then.

Also, that lens is 50mm. The lens I've been using this summer is 18-55mm. Will it be awkward for me to adjust to a lens that only shoots 50mm for a class?

arod_77

Get it from Amazon--and no--that is the lense everyone would start out on in a photography class--your teacher doesn't want you zooming.

And yes--that lens blows away the kit lenses

spacerobot

Awesome, thanks for the help! I think I'll probably end up getting that lens with the k2. Heh, and all that is still cheaper than my math textbooks.

edit: apparently the camera body is only shipped through standard shipping from "Adorama Camera" Know of anyplace I can get just as good of a deal on the camera, and get it in time for my class? That is unless Adorama has excellent shipping speeds.

double edit: When proceeding through check out, the Adorama standard shipping is listed as " Estimated ship date for this item: September 13, 2007 - September 14, 2007". So it should make it by the 19th possible?
Sorry for the noob questions, i don't order many things online.

arod_77

itll' make it--but if its important youll' want to expedite

also you know you need a UV filter right?

also--are you shooting in black and white film? If so you need a yellow filter

saltiness

I'm assuming you already ordered the Rebel by now but just in case I want to highly recommend looking at craigslist or ebay for a used Canon Elan 7. It's a significantly better camera than the Rebel and can be had for cheaper in most cases.

Also, you will benefit a lot from using a prime lens like the 50mm f/1.8. It teaches you to move around more and look for interesting compositions rather than relying on a zoom lens.

edit: and I disagree with arod_77, you don't need a UV filter, especially not for the 50mm f/1.8 because the lens basically has a hood built into it and a yellow filter is not necessary for b&w especially when you're just starting out (I'm assuming you're shooting color though, because it's slide film).

spacerobot

I actually have not ordered it yet. I will be ordering it tomorrow morning/afternoon probably. Why would I need a UV filter? just for lens protection? And it will be in color film.

arod_77

The best reason in your case would be lens protection.

Maybe I exaggerated a little because as a resident of Florida--I need a UV filter

spacerobot

arod_77 wrote: »

The best reason in your case would be lens protection.

Maybe I exaggerated a little because as a resident of Florida--I need a UV filter

In what way does a UV filter change the appearance of photos? I have a polarization filter for my digital camera, but I don't know what UV filter will do.

saltiness

A UV filter can reduce glare but it's so minimal that you won't be able to notice it. Most people use UV filters as protection for the front element of the lens but with the 50mm f/1.8 the front element is already so recessed by design that it's not necessary to use a filter unless you're running around in the rain or ocean spray.

Also, I didn't mean to give the impression that the Rebel is a bad camera. It will take perfectly good photographs providing you know how to use it. The Elan 7's just have better ergonomics and build quality.

blincoln

One thing to keep in mind when you're interested in using the same lens on a digital and film SLR is that on nearly all DSLRs there is a crop factor because the sensor is smaller than a piece of 35mm film. For example, on my D70, the crop factor is about 1.5, so when I use my old 28mm lens, I only get about 42mm worth of field of view.

Canon makes a couple of DSLRs with full-frame sensors, but the Rebel is not one of them.

This gets to be more important when you consider buying a *new* lens as opposed to an old one. If you try using a lens designed for a smaller DSLR sensor on a film camera, you are probably going to get some significant vignetting, because its optics are designed to cover only the DSLR sensor size, not the full 35mm frame size.

A UV filter is supposed to reduce haze. Ultraviolet light is diffused more by the atmosphere than visible light, so if it shows up in your picture it can make distant objects seem more indistinct. However, Canon's sensors have next to no UV sensitivity, and even on a DSLR that does (like a Nikon) the UV sensitivity is so low compared to visible that I have trouble believing a standard UV filter (as opposed to a "haze" filter that also cuts out some of the blue) will actually have a noticeable effect. A lot of people put them on their lenses to protect the lens. If you're going to do that, make sure to get a decent-quality UV filter so that you're not screwing up the optical quality of your pictures in the process.

Pheezer

If you're going to attach a filter use a circular polarizer for shooting outdoors and just clear glass for shooting indoors (unless you trust yourself not to break your shit, in which case you really don't need anything indoors)

blincoln

Yeah, actually, that brings up a good point, which is that most filters that say "UV filter" are just clear glass, because glass does not transmit UV-B or -C. It does transmit UV-A pretty well though. I would still recommend getting a decent-quality one though if you're going to use it. There's no sense in spending $200+ on a lens and then sticking a $5 piece of glass in front of it.

Pheezer

Well a decent Optex cpol will cost you around $40. Which is really all you need if you're using a kit lens anyhow. $25-$50 per filter is really all you should spend until you're looking at shooting with L series lenses or you've moved on to higher end prime lenses.

spacerobot

I've been using a circular polarizer with the kit lens, and it's been decent so far. It only cost me $25.00 though, so probably not the highest quality. What would be a good brand that's not too expensive, for filters?

edit: oops, Dr. Dizaster answered that.

saltiness

If you don't notice anything wrong with the filters you have now then don't bother buying more expensive ones.

blincoln

DrDizaster wrote: »

Well a decent Optex cpol will cost you around $40. Which is really all you need if you're using a kit lens anyhow. $25-$50 per filter is really all you should spend until you're looking at shooting with L series lenses or you've moved on to higher end prime lenses.

Yeah, or unless you're doing unusual work or need big filters. I didn't mean anyone should spend $150 on a Tiffen UV filter for their kit lens, but I would also not recommend spending $5 on a Filter Gear Solid Supar UV Protectar either.

Pheezer

spacerobot wrote: »

I've been using a circular polarizer with the kit lens, and it's been decent so far. It only cost me $25.00 though, so probably not the highest quality. What would be a good brand that's not too expensive, for filters?

edit: oops, Dr. Dizaster answered that.

When I say $25-$50 I mean on the Canadian market. Despite our dollar being nearly at par, we overpay heavily on consumer electronics. So you don't have a low end filter, you likely have a perfectly average filter that will be just what you need for the next few years if not longer.