Beginner needing lens recomendations please

[steveburling]

Hello everyone

 

I have only recently properly got into photography and as i enjoy it so much and want to start taking it more seriously

than point and click i have decided to buy a new slr after reading alot of reviews and working out a rough budget for

this i have plumped for a Canon Rebel XSI but am unsure about what lenses to get with it...now bearing in mind that i

am heading to Nepal in a couple of months and will be wanting to shoot portraits aswell as landscapes do you think i

should go for the bundled package of an 18-55mm and a 55-200mm for an extra $700 or get a 50mm with another

lens and if so any ideas...I am currently living in New Zealand but have converted to U.S dollars to help....I dont own

any lenses at the mo as this is my first SLR...i have a budget of about $700-$800 for lenses and would like to take

some candid shots aswell so might need some a decent zoom....so many choices my brain urts

 

Thanks for any input and ideas

 

Steve

[andrew_gale]

I always recommend a 50mm prime. They are less than 100 in america. Its a good starting place. I love primes and would tell you to buy fast primes over slow zooms all day long, but I truly think this is the best value lens. You get quality and speed that pros don't get in a $1700 zoom. You can take a few steps forward, or back and you have a zoom.

 

The 18-55 is also 100 bucks over here. 165 if you want IS. the 55-200IS is less than 300. So it sounds like the package is a bad deal, but since NZ costs more maybe it is about the same. Personally, i wouldnt pay $700 to get $450 worth of lenses.

[andre_reinders]

I would have to disagree in this case - sort of. A 50mm prime is a great suggestion for a lot of cases, but based on a full frame not on a cropped body like the XSi. When I moved from Film to Digital (20D cropped sensor like the XSi) I almost stopped using my 50mm f1.8 prime. On this camera you would be looking for a 28mm, or a 30mm, or a 35mm to get the same field of view. The Sigma 30mm is popular.

 

For a first camera I would get an 18-55 kit lens - and then after using it for a while - decide what you really need. If you want better build and quality - I would still suggest the same range to cover wide landscapes to moderate portrait use - but look at a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 or a Canon 17-55mm f2.8 (but I think this is out of the $ range)

[fotografya]

I would have disagree in that case, a 50mm EF/ f 1.8 lens is still a good option ( actual 35mm equivalent is 80mm), for street portraiture and basic street shots. It is light ( in weight and price) and can be used when someone upgrades to a FF body. Just my opinion. MF

[nathan_meador]

I would suggest the prime as well, even on the cropped lens, as it gives excellent pics for the money. My only reservation is the overlap you would have if you did get the kit lens. What you might consider is buying one lens, or get the kit lens, and then spend $50-$100 renting 2 additional lenses. One wide angle, and one zoom (say 100-300mm). This way you have a lens you can continue to use, plus rent the others for your trip and see how you like them. You won't be wasting money on a lens you may or may not actually want to keep. Not sure what is available over there, but you might look into it.

[joe_fikes]

I have a little program called "exposureplot". It gives you the statistics of which focal lengths, f-numbers, etc you commonly use. It claims that in the 30,000 - 40,000 images I've shot in the last four years, fully half of them were taken with my 50mm, f/1.4. For the record I also have a 16-35, a 70-200, recently a 28-135 and a TS-90. If I report back in 2 years I expect half of the 60,000 shots by that time to be with (are you ready?) the TS-90!

 

Regards,

 

Joe

[arie_vandervelden1]

Get the two kit lenses - 18-55 IS and 55-250 IS. They are lightweight - a major consideration when trekking in Nepal.

 

Best light for landscapes is in the morning when it's usually bright and sunny. You won't need fast aperture - you'll be stopping down the 18-55 for dof. Get a polarizer, but be careful with it because at altitude it'll turn the sky almost pure black.

 

Best light for portraits will be later in the day when the clouds roll in and the light is softer. The 55-250 will work just fine - if you need extra shutterspeed, just turn up the iso a bit. I don't think you need a super fast lens. You'll be shooting outside - Nepali people live their lives outdoors and only really use their homes for sleeping. Remember, always ask first. If there's one thing that Nepalis complain about when it comes to tourists, it's cameras being shoved in their faces without permission. They don't like it. You'll find kids happy to cooperate, but elderly people may be more hesitant. Don't give up and keep asking - I got some very nice shots when I spent a few months there back in '01. Enjoy.

[g dan mitchell]

For your Nepal trip you probably need to keep the weight/bulk of your gear to a minimum. You are a new DSLR shooter.

Your budget is limited.

 

I think that the combination of the 18-55mm kit lens and the 55-250 EF zoom would be great for your situation. I would

not bother with the additional prime in your situation - you aren't going to develop the "chops" to really make use of that

between now and the time you leave, and it is one additional piece of gear you don't need.

 

I'd get a significant amount of memory card storage and extra batteries. You'll also need a bag of some sort for the

camera and lens.

 

Dan

[bob_osullivan]

The 55-250 is too slow for portraits. You need at least F2.8 for nice DOF and bokeh (blurred background).

 

I think the kit 18-55 IS might be ok for your needs. But make sure it's the newer IS version. It's pretty sharp according to the reports.

 

Also, get the 50 1.8 for portraits, it's a great lens for that on your XSi crop body.

 

Lastly, do you really need the long end 55-250? It also gets good reviews. If so, then see if you can buy these separately cheaper as Galen indicated or is the kit the better deal. Either way, you MUST get the 50 1.8 for portraits, you won't regret it.

 

If money is tight maybe leave out the long one 55-250 and just get the 18-55 IS and the 50 1.8.

 

Good luck.

[g dan mitchell]

"The 55-250 is too slow for portraits. You need at least F2.8 for nice DOF and bokeh (blurred background)."

 

It all depends on what this new photographer means by portraits, doesn't it? If he means "studio style portraits with very

narrow DOF and soft, diffuse backgrounds" it will be difficult to get that with these lenses. (Though not impossible with

the kit lens, to be sure.)

 

If he means "I want to take pictures of people" in addition to landscapes and other stuff, the kit lens and the 55-250

should do the trick quite nicely.

 

Dan

[jason_hall5]

What G Dan Mitchell said...

 

Not that what the others have said are wrong or not true, its just that as beginner there is much to learn. The 50 f1.8

that so many recommend (it is a great lens for the money) would give nicer background blur and so on for portraits,

however you will have alot of trouble at this point even getting correct focus with it. With that lens, it would be easy

to get the nose in focus and eyes still be blurry. With practice and experience that would be simple to correct with

proper technique. Heck you can have the eye brows in focus and still not the eyes. (BTW, eyes are the most

important part of the "typical" portrait. I have to say typical because all rules are meant to be broken and are subject

to artistic differences. Of course you should know and master the rules before attempting to break them. I digress...

 

Point is at this point. K.I.S.S. is the rule, (Keep It Simple Stupid). The zooms are "slow" (meaning that they do not

allow as much light in as some lens do), But with a steady and IS to help, you will do fine. I started (as many of us)

with those slow lens also. The idea of starting with a prime is from when prime were the only good lens around,

zooms were not very good and very expensive. Not that is not the case. While primes (fixed focal length) do

produce better images for the money, they are very limiting. With a zooms you get to try a variety of focal lengths

and find what style fits you. Then later as you learn you can get better zooms or focus on specific focal lengths with

primes. Personally, to me no collection is complete with out a healthy selection of both.

 

 

Besides who says that a good portrait can only be taken with f2.8 or bigger. There are many taken at f8

 

Jason

[photo_dark]

"I have a little program called "exposureplot". It gives you the statistics of which focal lengths, f-numbers, etc you commonly use."

 

Very cool program! Thanks Joe :)

 

Apparently I do a whole lot of shooting at 50mm @ F2.8

[manuel barrera houston,]

the 17-40 L on a crop camera is equivalent to about a 28-70 on a full frame, wonderful coverage for almost anything you want. A great lens, excellent price, and very well regarded.

[JDMvW]

Another vote for G. Dan's suggestions. Get the new "kit" EF-S 18-55mm IS and the EF-S 55-250mm IS as your base. As a bundle it should not be US $700 more but about US $300 more than the body alone, at most. I don't know what the VAT and other tax situation is in NZ, so...

 

The 50mm prime is swell, if you can swing another US$ 80 or so. It will give you low light capabilities you will not otherwise have, plus its optical quality is very good in absolute terms and an incredible gift to EOS users by Canon considering its price. It's also close to ideal for portraiture.

 

If money were not a problem, there is another prime lens that is more costly, but would give you low light capability and something closer to a "normal" (50mm EQUIVALENT) on an XSi -- that is the Canon EF 35mm f/2.0. Also in the normal range, and in-between on price is the 28mm f/2.8, but it does not give as much in the low-light arena.

 

There's a little more discussion of these at http://reviews.ebay.com/A-Guide-to-Inexpensive-Canon-EF-Primes_W0QQugidZ10000000004546950

[andreasb]

I started out with a Canon 40D and a Sigma 18-200mm lens with optical stabilization. Since it was my first DSLR camera and I did not know what I was doing, I really did not know what kind of lenses I would need when I got better at photography. It covers a broad range of photo opportunities and the wide end of the zoom range is very useful on a crop sensor camera like yours and mine. This lens is also pretty good at macro photography. The optical stabilization works very well.

 

As others have pointed out, there are far better lenses and I have collected quite a few of them since then. But, for simplicity and light weight, I still find myself using the 18-200mm lens quite often. In my opinion, this lens was perfect for me at the time and is still useful when I do not want to carry a heavy bag of lenses around with me.

 

The image quality is really pretty good. I am by no means a pro but I have done very well in several photo competitions in my area using the 18-200mm. The other photographers in the competition all had far fancier equipment then I did at the time and they were all amazed at the results I got with my camera and single lens. Getting the right photo in the right conditions is often far more important than having fancy gear, in my opinion. Right now I am preparing for another regional competition, which can be a lot of fun, and about a quarter of my photos were still taken with the 18-200mm.

 

In the USA, the cost of the Sigma 18-200mm OS lens is about $450. I would recommend it as a great single starter lens for any beginner on a tight budget.

[yakim_peled1]

My line of thinking WRT lenses is simple: Buy the best you can afford. You will never regret it. I also think that a fast aperture is a very important feature and will work for you in low light situations where flash is either not allowed or is very obstructive. Sure, IS can also work for you in such situations (provided that your subject is not moving) but if I had to choose between the two I'd get a fast lens over a stabilized one any time.

 

Remembering the weight, bulk and budget issues my recommendation goes to the Tamron 17-50/2.8 (landscapes, indoor portraits and a general purpose lens) and Canon 85/1.8 for outdoor portraits.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[steveburling]

First off thanks to everyone for your help it is most useful...i think i will go for the bundled lenses but shop around for a better deal...then i will re evaluate at a later date to see the kind of photography that is really grabbing my attention....cos at the mo i just am really enjoying all aspects of it...it is very nice to know that if i need advice then i can come on these forums and get some great ideas from all of you.

 

Once again thankyou all very much

 

Steve

[neill_farmer2]

Steve, The price of Canon lenses in NZ is getting to the point of being a rip-off. You will save considerable money if you purchase your lenses in Australia or Singapore on the way through. Prices are about the same but you have the hassle of having to bargain in Singapore. There are a couple of mail order dealers in Sydney and Brisbane who will allow you to pickup from their unit or deliver to your hotel room, not quite US prices but way better than NZ and Australian retail. Digital Discounts in Sydney comes to mind. My guess is you require something starting at around 17mm and going up to 50mm?, chose any but price = quality. I'd also get a tele, the 50-150mm range seems best for you. If the lenses you purchase aren't fast, f2.8, I'd think about the 50mm f1.8, it's built like a kids toy but it is sharp, don't knock it tho', it's delicate.

Neill

[rob 101]

I would recommend the Tamron 28-75mm 2.8. Its light and compact and pretty sharp for $350. If you want a wide check out sigma 17-40mm it's a decent lens and stopped down its fairly sharp. I have owned both of these lens and did well with them.

[haziz]

How about all three lenses? The two kit zooms will give a significant range and the 50 mm f1.8 will give you a good, fast portrait lens and a

lens for available light indoor shots.

 

Sincerely,

 

Hany.

[dan_hall4]

Get the Xsi with 18-55 kit lens, the 50 mm f/1.8, and the 55-250. Add a high quality circular polarizer and step up/down rings. Get spare battery and more memory cards than you think you will need. They are getting cheaper all the time. Check out B&H Photo/Video (online). Below is a link... Great people to deal with.

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/542180-REG/Canon_2756B003_EOS_Rebel_XSi_a_k_a_.html

[JDMvW]

Be aware, however, that the use of a polarizer on these lenses is a little difficult because of the rotation of the front element of the lens in focusing, --it means to use a polarizer you need to focus first, then (perhaps after turn off AF) adjust the polarizer for effect.

[marcomariano]

if i were the the thread starter, i'll be more confused on the overwhelming & contradicting inputs.

 

i once also asked the same question with also the kind of response answered.

 

some one will recommend this bang-for-the-buck prime lens, then some one will oppose.

 

some one will recommend to pair it with this telezoom lens, then some one will oppose again.

 

no ending of recommendation/opposition thing...

 

 

the best and cheapest for now and i say for now is your choice of dslr which is 450D(XSi) + its kit lens EFS 18-55 IS.

nothing more PERIOD!

 

if you think that you have outgrown it, thats the time to upgrade.<div></div>

[JDMvW]

It's odd. Imagine that there are different opinions on P.net!

 

Who would thunk it?

[sheygetz]

Different opinions are fine, JDM, as long as there's a modicum of consideration for the original question and the person asking it involved. If they come across as mantras such as "I always recommend a 50mm prime" - for example - hurled at self-confessed greenhorns, that's not really helpful. And *they* carry the implication there could be no other opinion on the matter.