Tamron AF 55-200mm F/4.5-5.6 lens for Canon DSLR, only $109.95 pickup at any Ted's store. Chadstone has 9 left as of 11/12/2010. Make sure to let the staff know that it's $109.95 as it scanned in at $119.95 when I picked mine up.
Decent lens for amateur photographers to accompany the standard 18-55mm lens that normally comes with the basic Canon DSLR kits.
I bought this lens for $100 last year however this is still a very good price
Can also get FREE shipping from Ted's if paying by Paypal:
http://www.teds.com.au/paypal-xmas-offer/w1/i4468861/
this is one of the worst lenses ever made
Interesting but no IS / VR (image stabilisation / vibration reduction). "Good" price for this model - but then it is a cheap model - and not a particularly desirable lens.
The vibration stabiliser is particularly needed for lens at higher zoom and also to assist in lower-light setting if the largest possible aperture size of the lens is fairly small - like on this one (i.e. f/4.5 and f/5.6 maximum).
Probably better off putting cash towards an 18-200mm with IS / VR…
Yeah, realized that after purchasing the lens. Still a good lens to have for those on a tight budget and being very limited to the 18-55mm IS lens. Definitely need a tripod for shooting at 200mm and in low light otherwise using a higher shutter speed + steady hands in good lighting conditions will yield decent results.
As I'm very new to photography, this will do me fine until an upgrade in the future =]
See my comment above. Maybe that's why is rates well on Sony because every lens is stabilised :-)
If you have paid $500 to $1500 for the DSLR camera body then it's because you want to move up a level in the quality of photos you are taking. So a lousy lens is letting you down.
Nikon and Canon are the standards in DSLR's.
Almost all of the kit lenses put out in packages by Canon and Nikon with the bodies of their beginner and enthusiast range DSLR's are poor quality lenses.
So in almost all cases, the cheap lens obtained for that extra $100 is falling far short the quality standard that you are stated you wish to achieve when you bought a Nikon or Canon DSLR body.
So, if you want to achieve that DSLR high-quality standard that you body choice alllows, you are actually almost invariably better off buying just the body - or negotiating an alternative lens.
I've been slow to accept that, hard as it might be to resist our OzB-sharpened "bargain instinct", we have to realise that actually we don't ever want a "cheap-quality" lens in our camera bag - much less attached to our schmick new camera! The only reason to pay even $20 extra for it would be to sell it for more on eBay.
Tamron make some fabulous lenses - this ain't one of them. Sigma make some very good affordable lenses too.
The one exception I would make in regard to Canon-mount $100 lenses is the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II. Note that this is a cheap lens with a cheap build-quality but which has an excellent photo quality. NB: only buy it if you are gentle on your gear - as it is very light-weight construction. Good for years of great shots - if it doesn't get knocked about.
Is there something in the Nikon world that matches the Canon's EF 50mm f/1.8 II in regard to quality and price/value??
I'm very keen to hear suggestions of any other lens options that stand up to the quality hard-gaze of the online reviews in the sub-$300/$350 price point. Lenses that, like the Canon 50mm f/1.8 II, really can deliver champagne photos on a beer budget!
Get this lens:
1. If we use tripod, it's better to turn off IS/VR anyway.
2. If You have steady hands
All previous model DSLR and SLR (35mm) didn't have this feature (Image stabilization / vib. reduction) but still could take awesome pictures
This lens gets great reviews in the Sony/minolta mount so I imagine just as good in Canon. For interest the Sony version of this lens is a rebadged Tamron with the typical Sony premium price rag to match. Good find to OP.