Just primes

E

ElCapone

Suspended / Banned
Messages
247
Name
Elliott
Edit My Images
Yes
Buying a new dslr this weekend, probably Saturday. Origanally I was going to order online but decided to make a 100 mile round trip to get to the closest camera shop.

Still undecided with which camera to go for, narrowed it down to either the Nikon d7000 or Canon 60D. Which ever feels better in the hand I will buy, hence why I am doing the trip.

An idea I have is to buy just the body and 2 primes to start me off. Either a 35mm or 50mm together with an 85mm lens. All 1.8

Is this silly, should I buy a standard zoom lens instead?:shrug: Was thinking the 15-85 for the canon but then that rules out purchasing primes at this time.

Cheers, I will take all suggestions on board
 
Should add, intially my photographs will be of my kids. I also like night photography and landscapes. I guess these wont be that great for landscapes?
 
The 35mm will be fine for landscapes, I've used mine plenty of times with good results (and the 85mm). It's a common misconception that you need to go wide for the best landscapes.

As for the lens choice, if you're comfortable with your abilities and using primes, why not? However, if you're just starting out with DSLRs and photography in general the zoom will be more 'accessible' to start with.
 
I would say I am a beginner, dabbled in the past. I own and old canon dslr but have not done much with it tbh.

I was thinking of the sigma 17-50 2.8 for the canon or the 15-85 if I was to get a zoom lens and just the kit lens for the nikon. If I bought the sigma for the canon I could probably stretch to the 50mm aswel as its pretty cheap
 
Years ago when I made the move from pentax to canon I made the decision to get the new camera as just a body and 2 primes, ie in my case 50mm & 85mm, I never regretted it and the 85mm was one of my most used lenses for portraits even when later on I added a 17-50mm for wide angle shots and a 70-300 for wild life.

Given that the 50mm F1.8 is so cheap whether buying canon or nikon I would say get a 35mm F2, 50mm F1.8 and the 85mm F1.8. You'll get much better performance from the primes than you will from a zoom and all will be faster than a zoom covering that range.
 
A quality 17-50mm f2.8 (lots of people go for the Tamron) plus a couple of f1.8 primes would satisfy me! But I'd probably add a wide and a macro too at some point.

On APS-C I think I'd go for 30mm and 50mm, 85mm being a bit long, maybe, but it all depends on what you shoot and the field of view you want.

Good luck choosing! :D
 
iancandler said:
Years ago when I made the move from pentax to canon I made the decision to get the new camera as just a body and 2 primes, ie in my case 50mm & 85mm, I never regretted it and the 85mm was one of my most used lenses for portraits even when later on I added a 17-50mm for wide angle shots and a 70-300 for wild life.

Given that the 50mm F1.8 is so cheap whether buying canon or nikon I would say get a 35mm F2, 50mm F1.8 and the 85mm F1.8. You'll get much better performance from the primes than you will from a zoom and all will be faster than a zoom covering that range.
Click to expand...

Indeed, that's the set of primes I use and I can pretty much cover most stuff with those!
 
Would I struggle with primes though being a beginner?

What about bringing the Canon EF 17-40mm f4 L USM in to contention together with the 50mm 1.8. Using the 50mm for low light stuff for now and in the future adding another prime when I am more skilled.
 
A quality 17-50mm f2.8 would be a much better buy than the Canon 17-40mm f4, IMVHO. That lenses was designed as a full frame wide angle lens but on APS-C it's rather ho-hum IMVHO. With a quality 17-50mm f2.8 you get a slightly longer zoom range and f2.8, win win.

As for struggling, you may love primes. :D
 
Hey Alan, any suggestions for a 17-50 f2.8?

The Tamron is quite cheap, will search some reviews on this lens, and will allow me to buy the 35mm f2
 
I had the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 but as far as I remember from reading the reviews the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 is about the same. The Canon 17-55mm f2.8 is bigger, heavier and more expensive and may possibly shade the cheaper Tamron and Sigma for performance... but only you can decide if the additional bulk and weight are worth the (arguably) slightly better performance.
 
how happy were you with the tamron? If its close to the canon 17-55 then makes sense to save the cash for extra goodies
 
I went just primes for a while and when I got the X-Pro that was all there was at first. But, if you get a good one then zooms are just so damn good nowadays. There isn't really much in the IQ (if anything) and a good zoom can stay on the camera for at least 90% of the time.
 
ElCapone said:
how happy were you with the tamron? If its close to the canon 17-55 then makes sense to save the cash for extra goodies
Click to expand...

The Canon 17-55mm f2.8 wasn't out when I bought the Tamron and for me it was between the Tamron and the 17-40mm f4 and I want for the Tamron. To be honest I think I'd still have gone for the Tamron if the Canon 17-55mm had been available for size and weight reasons. The Tamron was very possibly the sharpest zoom lens I've ever owned and the only issue I could see was a little distortion at the widest zoom settings but having said that these zooms seem to exibit distortion at the widest end and I don't think that Tamron is worse than the others, actually for me it was a lot better then the Canon 17-85mm it replaced.
 
odd jim said:
The 35mm will be fine for landscapes, I've used mine plenty of times with good results (and the 85mm). It's a common misconception that you need to go wide for the best landscapes.

As for the lens choice, if you're comfortable with your abilities and using primes, why not? However, if you're just starting out with DSLRs and photography in general the zoom will be more 'accessible' to start with.
Click to expand...

Same sentiment here. 35mm is pretty nice for walking around with (I like to shoot landscapes mostly).
 
Not TOO much help here I'm afraid as I'm a newbie, BUT I did however have to make the 35mm v 50mm prime decision recently.

If you do go for the D7000, be aware that the DX essentially makes the 35mm prime become 50mm. I purchased the 35mm as I tried the 18-55mm kit lens I had on both 35mm and 50mm for a day to see which I preferred. I sometimes felt that the 50mm was too close for some of the photography I wanted where I couldn't move back any further, so I decided on the 35mm as I find you have more instances where you can move in easier than out.

It's a real each to their own thing, and I've found that you'll get very divided opinions online.
 
I must admit I much prefer using primes now - I have an 18mm f2 and 35mm f1.4 on a crop sensor, I'll add a 60mm to that at some point & I'll be set.

I thought I might miss the zoom option but in honesty I don't, I'd rather move myself for composition and have the wider aperture & image quality of the primes any day! For tele shots obviously a zoom will be much more convenient.
 
I think Im gonna go for the tamron 17-50 f2.8 and a prime, one of either 35mm or 50mm.
 
ElCapone said:
Would I struggle with primes though being a beginner?
Click to expand...

I struggled more with zooms, as in I just don't like them for some reason. I like the limitation of a prime (which I know sounds odd) and just having to shoot with what you have and not even think about zooming. I found a 35mm to be ideal for me on crop sensor.

Along with the added benefit of having a fast lens with very good IQ for little money.
 
I think the 17-50 f/2.8 is a good choice. But definitely consider what the kit lens is and how much it would cost you. If the camera kit comes with something like 18-55/18-105 you might be better off getting that to start off. As a kit you usually save a bit over individual purchase costs.

The kit lens won't have much resell value, but they aren't crap either. Then, after using it a while, you can buy specific lenses to solve specific problems for *your* needs.

Unless you move as fast and as frequently as your kids do a zoom is going to be indispensable.. Indoor portraits; a prime is probably the best cost answer.
 
Thanks everybody for your advice and opinions. I have got over night to think about it. Will let you know what I buy :)
 
Came home with the 60D with kit lens 18-55 and the 50mm 1.8

They didn't have the Tamron or Sigma 17-50 in stock which I why I bought it as a kit instead of just body, this way I get a little bit of practice with zoom.

Also bought a wee bag which will no doubt need replaced when I start to add more to my kit.

Excited :)
 
I bought a 650D with a kit 18-55 IS II lens which I used for a bit on my 60D and I got some surprisingly good shots with it. For the price of the lens it's a very good performer but as soon as you start doing some low light you'll realise its limits.

I swapped my 60D for a 7D a while ago and the only EF-S lens I have any access to now is an 18-135 IS, which is the wifes, and hardly ever gets used between the two of us. The widest I have now is a 24-70 and 24-105 and I'm thinking of swapping the 24-105 for a 17-40 to make sure I'm covered for a wide angle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top