Lens, am I missing out on alot of possibilities?

[c_k17]

<p>I just received a Canon Xsi camera with the pre-included 18-55mm EFS lens with an external flash. Most pictures come out great, but by looking at the camera, I feel like there is more to know than just using it as it is.<br>

Even though I have to learn alot about lens and cameras, I can't get past the idea that there are other lenses than can produce better results. The photos look nice but somewhat look alike like a point and shoot camera. Maybe my lack of experience in tweaking the settings, or a mix of knowledge with lens, but I've seen these great photos that are very crisp and well balanced. Taking into account that photoshop is used for fine tuning, I know that a better lens will produce that crisp organized look.<br>

I read somewhere about prime lenses, but I'm clueless. I would like to take great outdoor portraits and achieve the blurry background. What camera settings are the best? lens? are there camera limitations? people tell me to use AV mode because of the light. I don't like auto because of the difficulty with focusing.</p>

<p> </p>

[sattler123]

<p>Before you buy any more lenses, learn how to use your camera and how to post-process your pictures - that will make a much bigger difference than any lens you could buy.</p>

[bob_sunley]

<p>Read, practice, read, practice, read, practice. Start with the Learning Tab at the top of this screen. Once you know your camera and how it works or not works in all situations, then you can start to look at what to change, it could easily take a year or two. Yes there are lots of lenses that can get better results, IF you know how to use them. You can drop $5-20K on new lenses tomorrow, and won't get any better results than you are getting now. </p>

<p>It's really the computer sitting about four inches behind the viewfinder that gets the good photos, not the ones in the black box in your hands.<br>

Enjoy.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>A better lens will not produce that crisp, organised look - it may do that, in the right hands when used right. First consider your own photographic skills before upgrading gear.</p>

<p>Now, if I wrap up your last questions about settings, it reveals that you have some learning to do. Since you say you "just received" this camera, you cannot yet have much time under the belt with it. Give it some time. Don't expect the first shots to be miracles immediately. Read "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson, take a photography course, read the camera manual and the learning sections here on p.net. Get real experience with your camera and the files it can produce - and then, with time, you will know which lens you'll need to fix the shortcomings of that 18-55.</p>

[john_a5]

<p>I had a Canon XT with the kit lens 17-85mm and made great photos with it. Maybe the difference was that you are new to making images and I had been doing it for almost 30 years at that point. I don't say this to be arrogant, but the problem with most beginning, and many long time photographers, is they think equipment will make them better. It is about learning to see--both in the field and in the post production end of things. Getting proficient with the gear and with your visual practices.</p>

<p>Feel free to go to my website(link is on my profile) and look at "Texas 2 step" and under Amtrak "on the road". All of the images in these two sets were shot with the camera/lens listed above--then you can think about what might make your work better.</p>

[SCL]

<p>As others indicated, your camera and current lens can produce pictures which are wonderful, provided you understand the fundamentals. It is not like "Paint by Numbers", and after going thru the steps you have a painting (sort of); you need to become familiar with your tools, how they work and interact with each other, and learn something about lighting and composition. Even point & shoot cameras can generate outstanding shots in the hands of knowledgable photographers, so I repeat...your present tools are fine, for at least a year. Don't waste your money chasing after things which you think will improve your results until you understand how everything works. Using a camera well requires a functioning brain which is trained. You have the brain, now take the time and effort to train it. You'll be amazed at the results.</p>

[philip_tam]

<p>C K: Your camera and your lens are both very good, so rest assured that you have the right tools to create some great pictures. Point & Shoots can also be great cameras also, so don't be disappointed because your pictures look similar.</p>

<p>Like everyone has said, you have to read, learn, and take lots of pictures (while critiquing yourself) to improve. There are no shortcuts, and you can't buy yourself better photos by buying lenses.</p>

<p>However, a good starting point, since you ask, is follow your friends advice and start with Aperture priority (Av). Set your aperture to f/8. This is your lens' 'sweet spot,' where the photo will be the most 'crisp' (best sharpness), if you can keep your camera steady. Open to a wider aperture (for e.g., f/5.6) if you need more light, or a shallower depth of field. Stop down (for example, to f/11) if you need a wider depth if field. Use the lowest ISO you can get away with while keeping the camera steady.</p>

<p>Secondly, there are many composition guidelines, but one of the most important rules is to simplify your pictures. A lot of photography is about exclusion: you pick your subject, and you do your best to exclude out everything that will be a distraction to that subject.</p>

<p>The reason people buy prime lenses is because they tend to be sharper and have the ability to create shallow depths of field (thus, blurring the background) since they can open to larger apertures. So if you're interested in that, you may want to consider buying one (they're not cheap). But as others have said, you may want to play with your current lens until you get a feel for how aperture settings and focal length affect your pictures.</p>

[CoryAmmerman]

<p>I felt the same way when I bought my N65 with the 28-80 and 70-300 kit lenses. Blamed my crummy pictures on my "crummy" lenses, when it was really my crummy technique that was to blame. I bought myself a 50mm 1.8 and a 24mm 2.8 and... I still got crummy pictures. Now that I've gotten better technique, more understanding of how cameras work, and some experience under my belt, I get a lot more decent pictures. I still get plenty of crummy ones, but since moving to digital, they disappear with the touch of a button, and I can try it again. </p>

<p>By the way, I still use those kit lenses when I want the convenience of a zoom and don't need a fast aperture. Plus they fill in gaps in focal length between all of my primes quite nicely.</p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>Composition. It's the photographer who organizes the image in the frame. The lens and the camera have very little impact on that characteristic of the image. </p>

[brett_w.]

<p>I agree with the others, although a "kit" lens the 18-55IS compares favorably with other lens, just look at www.photozone.de and other review sites. It can take "crisp and well balanced" pics! Before spending more money on lens learn to use the ETTL external flash, experiment with aperture/shutter speeds/ISO settings to get sharper, more "balanced" pics</p>

<p> </p>