vincent_deschamps

<p>Hopefully I will be able to move up to full frame soon :)</p>

<p>I know how that might sound, and correct me if this is not true, but I've been told by several photographers that Canon lenses were of better quality than third-party ones. </p>

<p>I am going to buy the 28mm, and later on buy the 50mm 1.4...and later on maybe the 10-22mm zoom lens for landscape and group pictures. <br>

Thank you all for your advices! You have been very helpful. <br>

Vincent. </p>

<p>Hi Sravan, <br>

Thanks for your comments. Price is also a factor in my future purchase :) <br>

I guess my options are 24mm 2.8 or 28mm 1.8. I believe the blur effect with the 24mm f-stop might be good enough for me..I don't like over-blurred backgrounds. <br>

The 28mm is seducing because of the high f-stop which would make it easier for me to take pictures without using the flash in low light settings. </p>

<p>Hey Bueh, </p>

<p>Thanks for the answer. I looked at several pictures made with a 50mm 1.4 (in addition to the ones you linked), and I really like the very high f-stop and the fact that one can take apparently many different kinds of pictures with it (tho not that wide of an angle). </p>

<p>I forgot to ask you what focal length would provide me with how my eye perceive the subject on a half body? (Meaning a more natural angle of view) Seems the ideal would be that I have two prime lenses...glurp...</p>

Alas I don't have access to my pics to show you but below you can find an example of what I like to do (thee are not

mine).

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sampreap/3584321285/

 

 

Most of the time I like to focus on a part of the body or an object and have a wide background to place that person or

object into a context and not crowd the subject. And, of course, blurry the background...

Hi Buch,

 

So basically you are saying that a super wide zoom lens even with an f/stop of 3.5 will make the background shallow?

 

I don't lust for a super-wide prime, I want some flexibility in close-ups and wide angles all in once, if that's even

possible. For example I'd be interested to see close-ups made with the 10-22mm at 22mm with f/stop of 4.5. I looked

online on different forums and I could only find group shots of landscape which is why I would think that this lens

wouldn't be the best for close-ups with shallow effects.

 

Of course the ideal would be to have different lenses in my kit but I can only afford one at this time and that would

have to be under $1,000.

 

I greatly appreciate your help :-)

Hi Songsten,

 

I looked more closely at the 14-22mm suggested earlier by a couple of people. It seems to be taking pretty sharp

pictures but the f/stop being 3.5 at 14mm and 4.5 at 22mm, I wouldn't be able to do the blurry effects that I really like

to do. Even tho I am shooting different kinds of things, I like to do close ups and blur the background.

 

I've been using the 35mm f/2.0 for a while and I love how I can play with the backgrounds to focus on the subject and

do close ups, but I am lacking the possibility to have a wider point of view on the subject to give it more substance.

 

The 24mm 2.8 seems seems interesting too. Tho the f-stop is not that high, but the angle would be better. I was

interested in the 28mm because of the high f/stop, which would make the lens more versatile because I could make

low light pictures without having to use the flash.

 

I don't know if I'm making any sense anymore....:-)

<p>If I want to go very wide I'd add a 20mm 2.8 to my kit one day, tho the 10-22 mm zoom lens seems pretty cool too although I am looking for a high f-stop, hence the wide angle primes. </p>

<p>I looked at the 50mm 1.4 and it seems to be quite a good lens...probably something I will add to my kit very soon :) </p>

<p>Thanks for the additional answers! <br>

My zoom lens is not wide enough for me...and yes I believe it is 28-90mm, I don't have the lens in front of me to check :) </p>

 

<p>Thanks for your answers. <br>

I would like to go for a prime because I like how I shoot with a prime compared to how I shoot with the zoom ones (I shot with my GF's 17-40 and my own basic zoom lens and preferred shooting with the 35 all the time). Some of my friends who are professional photographers advised me to go with a prime lens as a main lens...so I'm confused now!<br>

I like doing artsy-blurry types of pictures most of the time which is also one of the reason why I want to go with a prime that has a high f-stop.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hello everyone, <br>

I'm been getting more and more into photography, thanks to my girlfriend, and I am looking to buy a wide prime lens that would become my main lens. My gf has a 35mm f/2.0 with which I played for a week and I loved it, except that I would love to have a bit more angle to capture more. I have a Canon Rebel XSi, so cropped body. <br>

I've been looking at several lenses (all Canon): 20mm f/2.8, 24mm f/2.8 and 28mm f/1.8. I believe that the 20mm would be a bit too wide to be my main lens, and I'm leaning toward the 28mm because it appears to be a good all-around lens, and the f-stop is quite seducing. <br>

I like to take pictures of...mostly everything that grabs my attention. Groups of people, portraits, close ups, landscapes, architecture, indoor....<br>

So my question today is: what lens would you recommend to be my main lens? Of course, I have a basic zoom lens (20mm-90mm I believe) and my gf is getting the 17-40mm L f/4.0. <br>

Thanks in advance for your advices! <br /><br />Vincent. </p>