Making the (expensive) jump into a DSLR camera.

[tdrayton]

<p>I am an amateur photographer in the truest sense of the word. I have been taking pictures for years but between my Sony point-and-shoot and my pentex super ME I have never been able to explore the finer points of taking beautiful, professional quality pictures. Nonetheless, I am fascinated enough with the field that I rarely find myself without my camera, and I probably see more of the world through my 2 inch LCD than not, and I FINALLY have the funds to consider a DSLR. I want a Canon Rebel T2i, and I have one general question. I am going to buy the standard kit, and was wondering if the standard 18-55 lense would offer enough range for general photography, (i.e. landscapes, portrait, outdoor/indoor) or should I buy just the body and an affordable 35mm lense to start out with and get my feel for the camera?</p>

 

[Matt Laur]

<p>I think you'll find the kit lens to be a better laboratory for learning what focal lenghts (in this case, from fairly wide to short telephoto) are well suited to your tastes/vision. You may find yourself wanting a longer lens down the road (sports? certain types of portraiture? wildlife?), but you'd definitely be missing out if you couldn't go wider than 35mm.</p>

[ted_raper1]

<p>Get the kit lens. The 35mm would limit you too much at this point - use the kit lens for a while and you'll soon learn where you spend more time, at the wide end or the long end. That will help you decide your next lens choice.</p>

[mark_sirota1]

<p>Huh. This seems an interesting turnabout; what happened to recommending an inexpensive high quality prime instead of a low quality, slow kit zoom?</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>I think an inexpensive prime lens <em>is</em> a great idea. In addition to a an inexpensive, <em>informative</em> kit zoom. Those kit lenses are practically free when you get them with the body. For someone who's just moving into this format, it's a lot better than trying imagine what 20mm or 50mm would look like.</p>

[martin_engineer]

<p>+1 for getting the kit lens. It's a jack of all trades and will give you an idea on which lens you'll want to buy next.... If you've got a few extra bucks, check out the 50mm f1.8 in addition to the kit lens.</p>

[tommyinca]

<p>"wondering if the standard 18-55 lense would offer enough range for general photography"</p>

<p>IMHO, Field of view of 28-90mm plus "IS" should be more then enough for a lots of cases. Add and pay as you go (aka: Learn)</p>

[tdrayton]

<p>Thanks for all the useful input, I am going to pick up the kit then I think, from the sounds of it, that lense will suit me in the first steps of starting a real porfolio.</p>

[riz]

<p>Go for 50mm.</p>

[danny_low]

<p>I have a friend who is a professional photographer and he started his career with a Pentax Me Super. So if you have been taking good photos with that camera, you are doing quite well. What makes a good photographer is not the camera but what's in the photographer's head.</p>

<p>Lens technology has advanced greatly since the days of the Me Super. In those days, APO and aspherical lens elements were only found in the high end lenses. Today they are common in consumer lenses. As a result you can get zooms that are as good as prime lenses on several of the focal settings at very reasonable prices. The main thing you lose is speed as the zooms are typically 1-2 stops slower than a good prime lens. However with ISO settings on cameras that go up to 1600 or 3200 and good post processing software, this is not the serious problem it once was. What you gain is the convenience of not having to constantly switch lenses and the possibility of lost shots as a result.</p>

<p>My personal all around lens is a Sigma 17-70mm lens with their 70-300mm. I also have a Tamron 18-270mm lens for hiking where I can only have one lens. The Canon 18-55mm kit lens is a good starter lens but I would also look at a short telephoto zoom as well.</p>

<p>Danny</p>

 

[jason_linch]

<p>i have the t2i with the kit lens, and since i bought it i have bought a 50mm 1.8 Mk I, and a 55-250 IS. I find this setup to be great to cover portraiture, landscape and wildlife. The 18-55 is a great starter tho and as others have said, it will dictate what lens you want next... love the cam tho, u will too</p>

<p>good luck, happy shooting<br>

Jason</p>

[rapyke]

<p>Personally, I use almost nothing but heritage (old) prime lenses on my DSLR, but when I started in digital I started with the kit lens that came with the camera - it is, by definition, an all-rounder.</p>

<p>As has been mentioned, good photos come from the equipment behind the viewfinder, but you need something in front of you to help out and the kit lens will do that in a relatively pain free way - it lets you relax and think about making a picture more than tuning the camera.</p>

<p>Take many, many pictures, look at the EXIF data for both the pictures that work and especially those that don't work, and have fun. Don't worry about getting 'professional' results out of the box - that comes once you know your gear well enough that you don't have to think about it at all.</p>

[mountainvisions]

<p>Thomas,</p>

<p>I am curious, you say you cannot take professional quality photos with your Pentax ME, I don't quite understand this statement. The ME is capable of taking any image that a DSLR might yield. If you aren't getting that level of quality it's not the cameras fault.</p>

<p>That said, I think a DSLR definitely allows more experimentation, more failure at a less expensive overall cost per image, and thus will allow you to improve faster. On the flip side I also feel like film makes people slow down and really understand photography. So it goes both ways.</p>

<p>Secondly, and more specific to your dilema, I wonder why you haven't considered the Pentax K-x. You would be able to use your Pentax ME lenses with it, and the body in the US can be found for as little as $400-500. For the price it is one of the best spec'd DSLRs on the market, and the image quality gets high reviews.</p>

<p>The K-x is probably the best entry level DSLR dollar for dollar (obviously such a statement is arguable, but it's certainly among the very best), and the fact you can use your existing lenses makes me wonder about your decision.</p>

<p>Beyond that Pentax lenses tend to be a better value to an amateur photographer since they seem to put a little more effort into affordable F/4 type glass without skimping on quality. The Pentax kit lens has won the PopPhoto kit lens shootout recently, and since then Pentax has actually released 2 improved versions of that lens. Furthermore, Pentax uses in body image stabilization, this means 1) you don't need to buy expensive stabilized lenses 2) you get image stabilization with your existing lenses from the Pentax ME. Again, this is a huge savings. You can scour ebay for $50 legacy K mount glass and get most if not all of the functionality (minus auto focus of course) from these lenses including full metering, stabilization, and body controlled aperture (this requires "A" glass, however). But all lenses, even M42 screw mount, will give you stabilized lenses. </p>

<p>I think overall from start to finish building out a Pentax system for your needs now and a few years down the road will cost significantly less.</p>

<p>I'm a fan of buying once, buying right, but I'm also a fan of buying what you will realistically use.</p>

<p>Of course the flip side of my argument is your friends have Canon equipment and you might be able to borrow their equipment, but how often will this realistically occur? I know I'm not eager to loan out my bread and butter lenses on a regular basis.</p>