Beginning photographer with beginner lenses--I need Help!

[berthas gallery]

I'm a beginning photographer and I have a Canon Rebel. I have the standad kit

lens and the 70-300 lens, neither of which are IS. Both are basic standard

lenses. My question is, what would be the best lens(es) to get for clarity,

sharpness, and portraits on a beginner tight budget? Am I better off with the

standard lenses I have or should I get something new? Should I get a lens with

a wider range of uses, or prime lenses for portraiture. Help! There's just

too much I don't know and even with comparisons, I don't know what would be

best.

 

Bertha.

[tommyinca]

I would add a Tamron 28-75 f2.8, for a little over $300. You can then use a kit lens for wide angle and continue to use the 70-300 for long. The Tamron should give you better image quality and better in door and portrait functions.

[ronald_moravec1]

Keep what you have until you can afford really good lenses. Don`t go half way. Your kit will be less good at wide setting like 3.5 than a good lens.

 

Maybe you can find a 35mm 1.4 or 2.0 prime lens for either low light just to use as a good standard lens. People used these for decades with good results and cheap zooms are a downgrade from it.

[anders_carlsson]

Portraits + sharpness + tight budget = Canon EF 50/1.8.

[rainer_t]

Just to reassure ... you have a "Canon Rebel" (which is a film camera) ... you dont have the "Canon Digital Rebel" or 300D ... which is a digital camera. Is that correct?

 

-- "Should I get a lens with a wider range of uses, or prime lenses for portraiture."

 

If you mainly shoot portraits, it might be worth to get a dedicated lens for that, but if portrait is something you do amongst other stuff, then probabely not.

 

-- "I don't know what would be best."

 

You know that its really time for a new lens, when you can exactly tell what kind of lens that should be. May be start to what your settings. Write down what settings you typically use for the different

kind of stuff you photograph. Also try to keep a record of how often you did what. The above is quite easy if you have a digital camera, but if you do film, thats additional work. Nevertheless, the information is useful to find out what you need.

 

Since you're a beginner, I wouldn't rush things.

[don_wilkie]

I second Tommy Lee's suggestion of the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, an excellent lens for the money. The image quality with that lens on a 20D and 5D is comparable to my "L" glass.

[jo7hs2]

I'll give you the same advice I try to give everybody I see asking a similar question. Read this thread, which I wish was from Photo.net, addressing what to do if you are wondering if you need better lenses.

 

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&message=16309636

[robert lee]

"My question is, what would be the best lens(es) to get for clarity, sharpness, and portraits on a beginner tight budget?"

 

Film camera right? For portraiture, you can do no better than the 85mm f1.8. Image quality will be noticeably better than zooms.

[christopher hartt dallas]

Get a "thrifty 50" and master the focal length. On your Rebel, you'll enjoy an 80mm field of view. Master this lens for your portraits and you'll KNOW what lens/camera you should buy next. The 50mm is an inexpensive education for many photography basics.

[m_barbu1]

I was going to post my suggestion, but Anders Carlsson beat me to it. On a 1.6x crop body, the least expensive sharp portrait lens is the 50mm f/1.8. It is "like" 80mm on a full-frame sensor.

[philscbx]

Absolute indoor, family, lounging, and your best friend the "50".

Very little bounce flash is needed to get great shots, or non at all.

Arm chair subjects with only a reading lamp, and you will be pleasantly surprised.

[berthas gallery]

Thank you all for your answers. Just to clarify some of the questions, I have the Canon Rebel Digital camera. If I understand what is being said, the 50mm lens is a "prime" lens? Prime meaning it doesn't change? Also, the f/1.8 and f/2.8, they are "fast lenses"?

 

The lens that i have is the 18-55mm f/5.6. I really like the lens and I've been practicing without a flash for a long time. I don't have the money yet to get the flash for the hotshoe. hopefully in the next few months. So I really don't use the on camera flash because it seems to wash everything out in all the wrong places. So I set my ISO at 800 or 1600 for the indoor low light setting, and of course I get noise, camera shake, blurred images and believe it or not, my images still seem to have spots washed out from the indoor lighting. I've used tripods to cut down on the camera shake and blurred images but still of course have the noise. My images are not sharp and this is where I thought a different lenses might be helpful. So with all the explanation, are my questions on lenses and your answers still valid... I want to call the camera store right now, I'm getting excited to find out about the lenses you've mentioned.

Thanks, Bertha.<div></div>

[m_barbu1]

f/1.8 and f/2.8 are both considered "fast", though f/1.8 is faster. At 50mm, the lens you have now can only shoot at a maximum aperture of f/5.6. All else being equal, the 50mm f/1.8 would let you shoot with a little more than three full stops of extra light (at f/1.8). This means that a shot at ISO 1600 can now be taken at ISO 200. However, you'll likely want to keep it at ISO 1600 (maybe 800) and increase the shutter speed, to get sharper images. If you get too close to your subject, though, you'll also have to contend with a shallower depth of field, though. Make sure to keep that in mind when comparing the sharpness of the lens at f/1.8.

[berthas gallery]

Wonderful! I thought that I understood it and I'm glad to find that I did. I just checked the local camera shop and they have a 50mm f/1.8 for $120 so I think I'm going to invest tonight and practice. The depth of field is something I'll have to work with but I'm thinking if I'm setting myself up for low key images and low lighting with a black background, then the depth of field shouldn't be a great issue. Correct?

 

Thanks for all the guidance.

[m_barbu1]

Whoah! That's too much! You can <a href="http://tinyurl.com/26vjhw">buy it here</a> for $100, including free shipping. Alternatively, <a href="http://tinyurl.com/3buoz6">B&H Photo</a> has it for $90, but they charge shipping separately. I'm all for supporting local businesses, but not at a 20%+ markup!

[m_barbu1]

Also, depth of field is the area in which things will appear in focus. What kind of background you have won't change the depth of field. For instance, at f/1.8, if you focus on the tip of someone's nose, the eyes will be out of focus (if the face fills the frame). The background makes no difference, here.

[arie_vandervelden1]

Primes like 50/1.8 and 85/1.8 are fantastic for posed portraits. They are harder to use for general family photography - zooms which allow quick compositions are better for that sort of thing.

 

Some folks will argue with this saying primes are just fine, you just have to be quick on your feet. True, in part, but sometimes you just can't back up through that wall, or lean right across the table to get that close-up shot of the kid blowing out the candles on the cake. I used to shoot with just 20/2.8 and 50/1.8 primes - got some great shots but I missed quite a few too....

 

IMO, four things will help you get better shots: 1) a hotshoe flash; 2) flash diffusion; 3) a faster zoom lens; 4) image stabilization.

 

Fast lenses (f/2.8 and lower) are nice because they capture more light, requiring less flash output, and thus giving a less harsh look.

 

One option that's top-of-the-line is a Canon 17-55/2.8 IS with a 430 EX flash and a Gary Fong lightsphere.

 

Canon 17-55/2.8 IS is expensive. I have a much cheaper Tamron 17-50/2.8. Great lens, very sharp, works well with flash, but it does not have IS. The new Canon 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS looks good, sharp, has IS, but it is slower than f/2.8.

 

For flash I recommend 430 EX. The 580 EX is much bigger, you'll feel like you're attaching the camera to the flash rather than the other way around. I have the older 550 EX and am often wishing for a smaller, lighter unit.

 

As for flash diffusion, there's a range of gadgets available. Lightspheres, mini softboxes, etc. Use bounce flash if you can. Some of us just tape a piece of tissue paper in front of the lens. Brings out the smiles ;)

[arie_vandervelden1]

<I>Some of us just tape a piece of tissue paper in front of the lens.</I> that should read: in front of the flash. oops...

[berthas gallery]

Thanks for the tip on the lens. I called another company in the next town and would you believe they had the lens for $140.00. Sure glad I have you guys to keep me straight. Thanks for the DOF explanation. I only had a vague understanding of what it really meant.

[m_barbu1]

While we're on the topic of price, don't forget about the current rebate promotion from Canon. It doesn't apply to the EF 50mm f/1.8 II, but you can <a href="http://tinyurl.com/2owyb5">save up to $125 on others</a>. These are <a href="http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=PromotionsAct&promocat=140">"instant" rebates</a>, unlike those of times past.

[craighagan]

two comments:

 

1) you've a pretty good set of starter lenses (really), with the possible already mentioned addition of the 50 f/1.8.

 

2) you mentioned a fear of camera shake; work on trying to either use a tripod or keeping the shutter speed above 1/<focal length>, and vary your iso to help maintain that

 

3) you mentioned using your flash, but that using it washes everything out. This suggests that you need to master your flash -- the on camera flash ain't great, but it isn't *that*bad*, plus the flash metering works the same way as a hotshoe flash, so learning how to "tame" it will help.

 

of note for your flash:

 

in the "auto" zone, only night portrait (person with a star in the background) considers the flash to be "fill" light rather than primary illumination, which means that the camera will try to meter to expose everything and then use the light of the flash to bring out the foreground.

 

in the creative zone, "P" assumes (like in auto mode) that the flash is the primary illumination and really lets things have it. unlike in auto, you can use flash exposure compensation to reduce the flash duration. Tv/Av assume that flash is fill light and metering works like in night portrait (meter w/o assuming flash, let it fill in the foreground). I believe M works the same way and that ADEP works like P.

 

We'll leave flash sync/etc for another time -- the above should be enough to get you to start being able to tame the beastie.