Advice On A Good Book For A Beginner And A Beginners Lens

[craig_draper]

Hi All, My wife has taken a very keen interest in photography for

some time now. Watching me and asking questions. I've decided that

I'm going to get her a 350D. Where I would like some advice is on a

lens and a good book. I know that the kit lens is said to be a good

beginner lens but I feel a normal prime may be better. 28mm, 35mm or

a 50mm. I started off at a young age with a manual SLR and a 50mm

prime. The kit lens is quite a slow lens so teaching her depth of

field would be better on a prime, also using your feet to zoom

taught me a lot. Am I being old fashioned? Finally could someone

please advise on a good book that I good get her that starts right

at the beginning. Depth of field, ISO, composure, etc.

 

Please all positive and negative advice welcome.

 

Thanking you in advance.

 

Craig

[gary_rhodes_ii]

In regards to a prime lens, I would recommend canon's 28mm f/1.8 which can be had for about $400 or even the f/2.8 version which is $170 (both prices at B&H). On her camera it should give her the field of view of a 45mm lens, much like the 50mm you used to have. I have the f/1.8 version and love it. As to a book, I don't own this one but have leafed through it at the store and it seemed like it would cover what you want:

<li><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0817463003/sr=8-1/qid=1147897213/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-1252360-6029511?%5Fencoding=UTF8">Understanding Exposure</a></li>

[markok765]

The camera is digital but the 35mm handbook would be good. i dont like the kit lens. the 50mm f1.8 is way better and about the same price.

[jcolwell]

The best book I've ever read is Freeman Patterson's "Photography for the Joy of It", Key Porter Books, 2000, ISBN 1-55013-095-1. I suggest that you combine the gift of a 350D with an immediate trip to the camera store where she can try different lenses and pick the one that best suits her.

[sean de merchant httpw]

<p>If you can find a copy, then <b>Photography for the joy of it</b> by <i>Freeman Patterson</i> is a good introductory book. You should in general avoid 98% of the books with <b>digital</b> in the title as they confuse control a computer and handling files with taking photos. The mentioned text is older and teaches photography, not handling a computer. As to digital manipulation, that is an entirely different realm just as working in a wet-chemistry darkroom is different from capturing images with a camera.</p>

[KenPapai]

A 50mm lens on a 1.6 crop sensor DSLR is much too long as a starter lens. Indoors it doesn't work (for a beginner). You are better off with a 28 or 35mm prime for a beginnner with a 350D body.

[John Crowe]

I have always had a preference for John Hedgecoe's books. I think I had the original Handbook and now he has a revised one.

 

 

I suggest the Canon EF 28/2.8 because it will be close to normal on the 350D/XT and it is inexpensive.

[ethan_kuefner1]

When put on a 1.6 crop camera, the 28 will be just under, the 35 just over (50mm).

Personally I would choose the 28, but if you really want the fastest lens/shallowest depth-of-

field, get the 35, which is a little bit faster than the 28. There is also an "L" version of the 35

that's f/1.4. That one, however, could get expensive. For the book, definitely

<i>Photography for the Joy of It</i> is really excellent, and was the first book I ever read.

My other favorite is <i>The National Audobon Guide to Nature Photography</i>, which may

become more applicable as time goes on but for now will be just a great book to read and

start thinking like a photographer.

[mike_meloy]

I strongly suggest the EF 28 f1.8 USM because it has 'Full Time Manual Focus'. The f2.8

version of this lens doesn't. Why not let her learn with all the tools and not just some of

them? She will want an FTM lens down the road anyway, so why spend the money on 2

lenses when you can just get it all with the first?

 

Just my $.02 worth.

[wolver]

Buy her an inexpensive, but very sharp 50mm f/1.8 and let her shoot with it for a couple months. This will give her lots of experience and a good idea of what focal length she may want next. This way you do not spent money on a more expensive lens that your wife may not use later.

[neild]

I'd suggest you give her a manual film SLR like you had. Any digital camera has too many auto settings which will tempt any beginner to use them rather than using their brains. I myself learnt using a fully mechanical manual-exposure-only film SLR with only a 50mm f/1.8 lens to use with it. Any camera she has should not have autofocus and preferably should not have the option for auto metering either. A beginner will always take the easy path if it is available, thereby taking much longer to learn the basics. If they learn the "hard way" then they will learn much more in a shorter period of time!

 

I now shoot digital and I don't think that I would have learnt a thing about what's going on if I'd started with digital (but maybe that's just me?). Also, although not by much, the crop sensor in the 350D will give more DOF for each f-stop and so will make it that much more difficult for your wife to appreciate how the f-stops affect DOF.

 

I'm guessing that she will not want to shoot film, especially if you have digital yourself, but IMO she will learn so much more if she starts with film, even if just for 12 months and then getting a 350D (or whatever is available then).

 

Anyway, that's what I think. No doubt, many will disagree with me...

[John Crowe]

A DSLR is great and inexpensive for learning photography though. You can learn on the fly rather than waiting to get your exposures back.

 

 

If you really want to slow her down, or at least a little, do what I do. Use Nikon manual focus glass on a 10D via an adapter. The camera will meter in Av or Manual but she will learn stopped down metering and how to set a lens for maximum depth of field at a given aperture. You can buy really great glass for relatively little.

[bennyboy]

You won't go far wrong with this book <a href=http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0131896091/qid=1147944247/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_3_1/202-3271673-9268607>Photography , Eight Edition</a>

[benbangerter]

Whatever book you get, make certain it explains why you cannot "zoom with your feet." That is, makes clear the difference between perspective and field of view. One example: "The Photographer's Handbook" third edition, by John Hedgecoe, pp 104-105. While a fixed focal length (or "prime") lens generally offers better optical quality, a zoom lens is far more versatile. Used sensibly, a zoom lens allows the photographer to easily explore the interplay of perspective and field of view in creating photographs. For a new photographer, there are many things to learn and master before becoming overly concerned with lens quality. I say get the 18-55mm kit lens, and the 50/1.8 for quality and to learn about depth of field. If you want better optical quality and are willing to spend the money, get the 17-40/4 instead of the kit lens.

[m_barbu1]

FWIW, I disagree that learning on a film camera is the best way to go for a beginner. I had an Elan and didn't learn a thing, because I was too afraid to experiment, due to the cost of film and developing. I learned more in the first month of using my first digital SLR than in the two years that I owned the Elan.

 

As for a lens, I cannot recommend the 50mm lens to someone that is just learning. It truly would be much too long on a 350XT -- the equivalent of 80mm on an Elan! Although it has great low-light properties, I ended up selling mine, because I just never used that focal length on a 1.6x FoV crop camera. Unless you're absolutely sure the focal length won't be a problem, I would recommend a standard zoom lens for a beginner.

 

I also agree that "using your feet to zoom" is a misnomer. A photo taken at 28mm, composed in a particular way, will look completely different at 200mm, composed the same way. True, that's an extreme example, but the example is also true at shorter focal lengths, though not as prominently.

 

If you really can't get the EF 28-70 f/2.8L USM, then I would suggest the EF 17-40mm f/4L USM.

[FilmPhotography-DuaneHorne]

Kodak had a publication "The Joy of Photography" and also "The National Geographic Photographer's Field Guide" are excellent text to learn from. I learned photography on a Canon Rebel (film) camera. From there I migrated to other Canon Models (film). My father in law gave me his old Leica flex SL2 a few years ago. It is a full manual camera, no auto focus or auto exposure; an incorporates a true spot meter. Working with that old camera has been an enormous benefit to my photography; I have learned so, so, much from a camera with no bells and whistles. I would strongly recommend learning to use a fully manual camera.

[awindsor]

I have a 50/1.8 and use it a lot but the "best EF prime" seems excessive. I suspect many would consider the 35/1.4 or 500/4 better.

 

Craig,

 

The 35/2 would be my choice if you want a single prime. A wider lens is also possible but I would avoid a longer lens.

 

If you want a zoom the the 17-85 IS is probably the best single lens solution for a 1.6 crop factor camera.

[KenPapai]

The 50/1.8 may well be the best EF prime there is if you ignore the ten Canon primes far better than it.

 

The 50/1.8 is a throwaway lens. Sure it's sharp but its 5-blade bokeh sucks and it's a nightmare lens for a beginner especially when mated with a 1.6 crop sensor.

[panorama7]

Hi Craig,

 

I'm surprised that no one suggested buying her a used 20d instead of a XT. She'll get a much better camera IMO and the most importantly all the controls will be easily accessible unlike the Dreble series (300/350). The 20d prices have fallen so much that picking up a used one in excellent condition with minimal usage is almost a no brainer IMO. I'm only disappointed because I'm going to sell mine soon and I've lost a lot of value in the last two months. You should at least look around and see what people are offering before buying the XT.

 

As for lenses, sorry, but I've never liked the phrase "zoom with your feet". It's not only impossible to do in many situations, but I also think that forcing someone to use a prime for everything today is a cruel effort in frustration. "Why don't you climb that tree and get a picture of that bird"? or how about "Why don't you back up 100 yards so you can fit this view in your lens"? This is 2006, zoom lenses are so good there's no reason not to use them (70-200 IS, 16-35, 24-105, 24-70, etc) are great - but expensive. I also think it's a useless hindrance to put on someone today when .

 

As for a book suggestion, you didn't say how much experience she has now so it's somewhat hard to recommend one. One book I think all starting photographers should read is "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson

 

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0817463003/sr=8-1/qid=1147988898/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-0220833-6302341?%5Fencoding=UTF8

 

It's a solid book that makes it easy for new photographers to understand what the different variables are (shutter, aperture, ISO speed) and how they affect exposure. I wish they had a book like this 30 years ago! :)

 

Other posters have also suggested some good books, but I think the first thing you need to know is how to expose. Worrying about everything else is secondary to exposure IMO.

 

good luck, Jim

[robert_hall2]

Get the 17-85 zoom because of its versatility, and shoot digital. Insist she use Manual exposure. I would not use film as someone said. Consider an Espson printer that uses ultrachrome ink, and a 580Ex flash (or Sigma equivalent) as second presents.

[daniel_heywood]

I'll add another vote for Understanding Exposure. Excellent book. I wrote a brief review <a href='http://danielheywood.blogspot.com/2008/09/about-seven-years-ago-i-picked-up.html'>here</a>.