What is good the 18-55mm standard lens for?

[taino_andino]

Hi all,

 

I was wondering what is this lens good for. I know is a wide lens but i dont know if its great. I havent got a great sharp pucture with this

one. Maybe is because i dont know how to use it yet or my cam at the fullest. So its the nikkor 18 - 55mm af 3.5 - 5.6.

 

Im planning to get the 50mm 1.4 af as im assist a photographer in a wedding and i read that is good in low light because of its aperture.

[leslie_cheung]

<p>It's a standard lens...meaning for casual, general photography in good light. If you can't get a sharp photo with it, either there's something wrong with the lens or user error. The 50mm f1.4 is good *but limited* lens on an APS-C camera. You do have an APS-C camera, right? </p>

 

[taino_andino]

Sorry for my ignorance :) i do not know what APS-C is. I have a nikon d3100. I know the 50mm is a prime lens wich dosnt

zoom. Bit can create nice bokeh and is great in low light...

[starvy]

<p>Taino,<br>

The kit lens is rubbish compared to the 50/1.4 however, you would need to either walk back to fit in more in the frame or go closer to zoom in. This is what photographers were perfectly used to before the era of cheap zooms. <br>

Use the kit lens stopped down to f8 or maybe even smaller aperture with a tripod and see if you are still getting poor results. These kit lenses improve quite a lot when stopped down.</p>

[phule]

<p>The 18-55 is a basic multi-tool kit. You can use it in a lot of every-day situations but it does not specialize in any one thing. It's a fine lens to start photography with so that you can learn its limitations and its strengths and find out what you need to further your own photography. For some people they find they need a telephoto or telephoto zoom lens like a 70-200mm or 70-300mm. Some people find they need wider than 18mm. Some people find they need a lens with a larger aperture for hand-held photography in lower light. But for a new photographer, you have to start somewhere, and the 18-55 let's you explore quite a bit as you're learning.</p>

 

[leslie_cheung]

<p>Yes, the d3100 is an APS-C camera (aka DX in nikon speak). The 50mm 1.4 is great in low light and has nice bokeh, I suppose, but having a zoom lens is more important for an event like a wedding. Of course, your boss ought to let you know...</p>

[phule]

<p>[[use the kit lens stopped down to f8 or maybe even smaller aperture with a tripod and see if you are still getting poor results. These kit lenses improve quite a lot when stopped down.]]</p>

<p>A new photographer will be making mistakes as a part of the learning process that will far, far, exceed any minor increase in image quality seen by stopping down. As the majority of the images will be viewed on a computer screen instead of a large print, this makes stopping down even less important. </p>

<p>Stopping down to f/8 is going to only frustrate (and limit) a new photographer, not help them learn. </p>

[taino_andino]

Leslie:

 

Thanks, yeah He just a friend and he told me to later get a nice zoom lens. This will be mu first wedding and i heard is a

good lens for details. Rings, portraits, arragements ect. I will get a zoom lens to. Wich one do you suggest?

 

Down a stop? Sorry for making to many questions :/

[Lou_Meluso]

<h1> </h1>

<blockquote>

<p>I was wondering what is this lens good for</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's good for many types of pictures with virtually unlimited potential. You can create poetic landscapes and stunning portraits with it. It is capable of creating award-winning images that will move you to tears. You can document your family, or the fall of a nation. What it is good for is helping express the very limits of your creative spirit. Shoot with it well and often.</p>

[newmanuk]

<p>Hi Taino, If you want a refreher on the terms IE down a stop go to the blue learning tab and check out the online textbook. Will help you through the upcoming engagement you have .......Miken</p>

[leslie_cheung]

<blockquote>

<p>The kit lens is rubbish compared to the 50/1.4</p>

</blockquote>

<p><a href="http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/234-nikkor-af-s-18-55mm-f35-56-g-ed-dx-ii-review--test-report?start=1">From photozone.de... </a></p>

<blockquote>

<h4>MTF (resolution)</h4>

<p>The Nikkor AF-S 18-55mm DX II produced surprisingly high resolution figures under lab conditions which is quite unusual for a lens in this price class. The center resolution is excellent throughout the zoom range. The border quality at the wide-end of the zoom range is soft results at max. aperture - both regarding resolution and more so contrast. However, stopping down to f/5.6 already improves the borders significantly. At 35mm and 55mm the resolution characteristic is more even across the frame. You may find the resolution of this lens to be quite astonishing and maybe hard to believe..</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The lens maybe lousy mechanically but, optically, it is much better than it gets credit for...</p>

[Matt Laur]

<blockquote>

<p>Down a stop?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Your kit lens, at 50mm, can only shoot at f/5.6 as its widest ("fastest") aperture. Essentially, the hole through which the light passes isn't very big at 50mm, so not a lot of light can get in ... and that means slower shutter speeds or higher ISO settings (or adding more light) to make up for that. If you're in good light, it doesn't matter as much.<br /><br />The 50/1.4 you're talking about can open up all the way to f/1.4, which is a <em>much</em> larger aperture, lets in more light, etc. But when you open up that aperture to such a fast setting, you lose depth of field (it's much harder to get a group in focus, for example ... you <em>must</em> practice that stuff). <br /><br />When we talk about "stopping down" the lens, we mean not using it at its widest aperture setting. So, your kit lens is at its fastet (at 50mm) at f/5.6 ... stopped down a bit it would be more like f/8. Your 50/1.4 could also shoot stopped down just a bit from its widest aperture (most lenses look better that way), but it would - even stopped down some - be much faster (gather more light) than the kit lens. <br /><br />What you need to do is read up on basic photography concepts: understand the relationship between ISO, shutter speed, and aperture. This is the most basic stuff that you need in your head, and there are lots of good resources out there, including articles <a href="../learn/basic-photo-tips/aperture-shutterspeed-iso/"><strong>like this one here on PN</strong></a>.<br /><br />Personally, I think I'd go with Nikon's 35/1.8 or Sigma's 30/1.4 as your first general-purpose fast prime lens. 50mm can be awkward for general purpose people shooting.<br /><br />Here's how you test this: use your current 18-55 kit zoom lens, and set the zoom to 30, 35, and 55mm while you see how far away you have to stand from people in various compositions in order to get the scene you want. Trying to record a head-to-toe, vertical-orientation shot of a couple of people standing at a wedding reception? You might be shocked at how far you'll have to back away from them if you're shooting with that 50/1.4 (it could be 15+ feet, or more if you're shooting a horizontal frame)... and in many social event settings, you simply won't have that kind of room. So find out what sort of shooting you're expected to do - that will dictate the tool(s) you need.</p>

[tom_mann1]

<p>Go to Google Images and enter {nikon "18-55" site:photo.net} into the search box.</p>

<p>a) You'll see a wide range of examples of what that lens is capable of; and,</p>

<p>b) You'll see that the statement that it is rubbish is an extreme POV, essentially inapplicable to probably 95% of all shooting situations. </p>

<p>Tom M</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Taino, given the way you phrase things...it sounds to me the problem is not the lens, but your experience and photographic knowledge. Instead of buying a lens, invest that money in learning photography. If you cannot get sharp images with the 18-55, then you should *not* blindly assume the lens is the problem, but learn to understand why they are not sharp. It's not necessarily the lens that is causing it.<br>

Post some samples here with full EXIF data, that might help us give a clue where the problem is.<br>

<br /> The 18-55 is not a bad lens. Its range is highly useful, and covers a lot of use (including 80% of the photos made during marriages - having only a 50mm on the D3100 for a wedding is a really bad idea). Experience and a bit of study will learn you just how useful the 18-55 really can be, and how good it can be when used properly. And with that knowledge, you will also learn to understand whether the 50mm f/1.4 is the best choice for you or not. At this point, don't worry about bokeh, but worry about understanding what the f/1.4-bit really means for your photos, and what its downsides are.</p>

<p>I am sorry if this sounds harsh, but a more expensive lens won't cure any of your problems if you don't know why your images aren't good at present.</p>

<p> </p>

[taino_andino]

Wouter:

 

No harsh at all i need this kind of advice! Im about to take a course this agust. And this sunday hopefully im attending a

seminar. So no harsh at all i need this to learn :)

[vrankin]

<p>What Wouter said! I fully agree.</p>

[carbon_dragon]

<p>If you don't know quite what you're doing, it's easy for a lens to look worse than it is. If the image is blurred you need some experience to know why.</p>

<p>Try this. Take your lens out in bright sunlight. Set the ISO to say 400. Set the camera to shutter priority and give yourself a nice high shutter speed, like 1/500th of a second. It should set a pretty high f stop. Try to get about f8 or at least a couple of stops more closed than the most open stop. So if the lens was f/2 you might try f/4. The progression is f/1 f/1.4 f/2 f/2.8 f/4 f/5.6 f/8 f/11 f/16. Keep it about f/8 or at least 2 stops closed down. Adjust the ISO if necessary till you have it right. 1/500th of a second should minimize motion blur (what happens when you move the camera too much while pressing the shutter). Shoot a few frames, letting the AF system focus in on what you're shooting at. Pay attention to where the AF sensor focus points are in the images so you know what was the point of sharpest focus.</p>

<p>Now go back to your computer and download the pictures and see what the sharpness is like. </p>

[jcuknz]

<p>+1 Wouter ... there is a simple test I am sure you can do to prove to yourself that the camera and lens is completely AOK. You place the camera on a firm base/support such as a chair or table/ wall and organise the 10 second delay function. You press the trigger and leave the camera untouched during the countdown and exposure. The result will probably be excellent and re-assure you that it is your lack of knowledge that is the problem you face and from what you write are endeavouring to correct. Best wishes and good luck in your endeavours.</p>

<p>There is a lot of foolish snobbery about kit lenses. Responsible camera manufacturers do not turn out junk these days but they do have good and top quality lenses, the latter for the highly discerning user and those foolish to think that equipment is what they need to take good photos. </p>

[taino_andino]

<p>I have tried what i've read from here and it is my lack of experience instead of the lens, as JC says is AOK.<br>

It Came up like this. Aperture Priority F/6.3 , 1/160<br>

http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/2556/dsc1863r.jpg </p>

[carbon_dragon]

There are quality differences between lenses, but almost any modern lens is pretty good. And it's not just you either. I

always had kind of a guarded opinion of my Leica Summitar 50/2 lens (came out just after WWII). But that was really

because my skill at focusing the old leicas wasn't quite as good as it should have been. I tried it recently, focusing VERY

carefully and it turns out it's pretty darned good. Always challenge your assumptions.

[johnw63]

<p>Taino,</p>

<p>Based on the info embedded in the shot you posted, you took the picture in shutter priority, shutter speed = 100th of a second and aperture = F11. If you thought it was 160th of a second and F8, then maybe you posted the wrong picture. </p>

<p> </p>

[taino_andino]

John i might have posted the wrong picture. But how do you know the settings? How do you check the embedded info?

 

But yeah how did that image came out? Im still dont know how a proper exposure comes out. I know it depends. But I still

cant be a judge.

 

Thanks! GB

 

-taino

[jcuknz]

<p>When it is not deleted as part of the process of 'saving for the web' with photoshop and probably other programmes there is 'EXIF' which gives a lot of details about each shot, probably more detailed than if you kept a notebook and recorded the data of each shot you took ... which was the reccomended practice back in the days of film ... with digital no need as the camera does it.<br>

The snag is you need an editing programme to read it ...I know how to find it with my Paint Shop Pro but with others I would be lost :-)</p>

<p>There is no 'proper exposure' because a whole range of combinations of shutter, aperture, ISO would be proper depending on what result you are after .... basically if it looks good to you it is probably good ..... though it might not have enough depth of field if that was what was needed to show a range of objects from quite near to far away and you could need a smaller aperture .... if you have good rendition of ground objects but that beautiful sky is burnt out white it probably means the camera is not capable of handling the range of tones from sky to shadows and it needs treatment in editing ... various solutions here too involved to go into at this point.</p>

<p>Ideally as I was taught there should be some detail visible in both the brightest highlight area and also in the darkest shadow area, but often this can only be obtained in a studio where everything is under your control .... usually one has to make compromises. With digital one can usually lift shadow areas in editing but rarely can you do anything with highlights so there is an expression 'Expose to the right' [of the histogram] which means one avoids burning out the highlight detail except the peak brighness that one is willing to let go to white.<br>

Using Auto Exposure a rough and ready precaution is to set the camera to minus one stop EV and watch for blinkies. blinkies is when/where the camera flashes at you in the viewfinder where it thinks it is over-exposed and you have a chance to adjust settings to reduce the amount of, or all of, the blinking. [a matter of trial and error until you get the result you want]</p>

<p>Unfortunately there are always exceptions to anything one says about photography which with experience you will learn , and quietly smile at, as you read what people write. Which makes photography such a fascinating activity.</p>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<p>You can find an EXIF viewer online for your specific OS. Mine being Mac OS X I have the free "EXIF Viewer" app. See the screenshot below what all it reads from the embedded data of your image.</p>

<p>BTW I think that shot shows your lens and camera system are exposing correctly and quite sharp for the kit lens you're using. Do what others have advised and not concentrate on buying better (or more expensive) equipment.</p><div></div>

[john_stockdale2]

<p>A useful image viewer is irfanview, easy to download, and is free. When viewing an image file, press "i" then "e" to see EXIF info. There may well be better programs out there as well.</p>

<p>Take lots of photos in different conditions. You're lucky to be learning in this digital age: many of us had to go through many rolls of film to improve.</p>