What lens would you choose as a novice? UPDATE - NEW LENS REQUIREMENT - ADVICE PLEASE

D

dellydel

Suspended / Banned
Messages
166
Name
Dale
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi Guys,

I am still doing a lot of research on buying my first DSLR, I am considering the Canon 600d or 60d, and at first, I was planning on going with the 18-55 IS II Canon kit lens.

However, now I'm not so sure. On one hand I'm thinking it will be a good lens to start with and will be capable of producing reasonable quality images to begin with. Then on the other hand, should I buy just the body and then look at the Sigma / Tamron ranges of zoom lenses with a continuous aperture throughout?

Any help / advise is appreciated.

Cheers,

Del
 
Last edited:
To be fair, the kit lenses are pretty good these days but for a little more money, you can get a better option that will probably serve you well as your creativity and familiarity with techniques grows.

We run Canons at work and we recently replaced an aged 20D with a 60D and Tamron 17-50mm for not that much more than the 18-55 kit cost. Think it was warehouse Express we got it from, who do different bundles.

I'd owned a Nikon version of the Tamron before so knew it was a good lens optically and wouldn't fall to pieces. The 60D I knew nothing about but it was very similar to our 20/30/40/50Ds, and featured video, which was something we wanted. The guy who uses that combo is mega impressed and it's proved to be a very easy-to-use body that produces great results wit respect to both still and HD video. The 60D is a bit bigger than the 600D in physical size, so that might be something you're interested in.
 
Last edited:
Hi Del

As above, there is nothing wrong with kit lenses nowadays, obviously budget is what is generally the deciding factor.

In the Canon range the 55-250IS is a cracker of a lens and can be got for about £170 or £220 for the new mkII.

I don't think you'd be disappointed with the kit lens if that is what budget demands. It's also a good starting point whilst you decide what you want to photograph / what focal length best serves your needs...
 
As above, getting to grasps with the kit lens is important. Then once you've captured some great images you can move on to a different/better(?) lens :)
 
50mm 1.8 would be one to look out for. I quite like the Tamron 17-50 too.
 
Thanks guy's, that seems like some good advice and reassured me slightly that the kit lens will serve me well until I have a good grasp of the camera and an understanding of capturing good shots!

I was just a little worried that I may be a little disappointed with it based on some reviews I have read, but I am pretty sure it will probably be a while before I reach the limits of the lens.

I am very tempted with the 'cheap' nifty fifty F1.8 as an additional purchase, as I know one subject I am definitely going to be shooting is my 9 month old daughter. Some of the pictures I have seen with this lens have been fantastic with lovely background blur.

Cheers,

Del
 
Use the 50mm myself and got to admit i am blown away by the IQ of it
 
If you are that much of a novice then it has to be 35mm 1.8

Equivalent to approx 50mm on a full frame.

It's a great 'learning' lens.

D in W
 
dellydel said:
Thanks guy's, that seems like some good advice and reassured me slightly that the kit lens will serve me well until I have a good grasp of the camera and an understanding of capturing good shots!

I was just a little worried that I may be a little disappointed with it based on some reviews I have read, but I am pretty sure it will probably be a while before I reach the limits of the lens.

I am very tempted with the 'cheap' nifty fifty F1.8 as an additional purchase, as I know one subject I am definitely going to be shooting is my 9 month old daughter. Some of the pictures I have seen with this lens have been fantastic with lovely background blur.

Cheers,

Del
Click to expand...

Lots of people seem to decry kit lenses but let's face it, no manufacturer is going to put a crap lens onto an expensive camera - and the 50mm f1.8 pricewise and I.Q wise just can't be beaten from f2.8 onwards and even from f1.8 it's very good.

.
 
dellydel said:
Hi Guys,

I am still doing a lot of research on buying my first DSLR, I am considering the Canon 600d or 60d, and at first, I was planning on going with the 18-55 IS II Canon kit lens.

However, now I'm not so sure. On one hand I'm thinking it will be a good lens to start with and will be capable of producing reasonable quality images to begin with. Then on the other hand, should I buy just the body and then look at the Sigma / Tamron ranges of zoom lenses with a continuous aperture throughout?

Any help / advise is appreciated.

Cheers,

Del
Click to expand...

If you can afford it the 28-135 is what I use as standard, it is superb, however if you check ebay a GOOD used 28-105 Canon is VERY sought after, NOT the cheaper one, the heavy f3.5 MK2, you will keep it a lifetime,

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/canon-28-...=UK_Lenses_Filters_Lenses&hash=item2eb7fdfc67

lovely
 
Last edited:
Thanks, does look like a cracking lens! Certainly one to replace the kit lens with once I 'out grow' it! Pretty affordable second hand too!
 
The best camera by far for this work is the Nikkormat FTn, bought mine new, still have it, will never part with it.
 
...and there was me thinking I'm a silly old duffer BUT.. I'm delighted to see how many experienced photogs still recommend starting with a standard prime (ie 50mm 1.8 or equivalent depending on chip size).
A few years ago a mate asked me to mentor his learning of photography. Despite his salivation over every wide, long and zoom he saw I insisted that for at least one year he should stick to the standard lens alone, my reasoning being that when he had learned to SEE photos in the first place, with his eyes, he would then be qualified to advance his techniques of capturing those photos with more kit. It worked, really, he's now a very accomplished amateur photographer and has a small but appropriate collection of lenses that match his needs and skills.
Sure, maybe a short zoom, around the 'standard' length will be helpful in various ways. But why complicate matters with yet another variable? You've got a hell of a lot to learn just to get going competently.
Best of luck to you. It's a great ride.
 
When I was a club member I was so fed up with the argument that "my camera is better than yours", and people winning comps because they had access to better equipment that I suggestes a 50mm competition.

The camera was loaded with 36exp colour 400asa film, a Pentax P30T which I supplied with a 50mm lens.

If 18 people entered they had 2 shots each and so on, it was a leveller.

I think all camera clubs should have such a comp these days, cheap DSLR with say 28mm lens, 4GB card and 4 photos each, it would also "teach" people the benefits of one lens.

From my Praktica Super TL, to my Nikkormat to my Nikon F I only had a 50mm lens, kniew nothing else, and my photography never sufferd.
 
Last edited:
peterforum said:
...and there was me thinking I'm a silly old duffer BUT.. I'm delighted to see how many experienced photogs still recommend starting with a standard prime (ie 50mm 1.8 or equivalent depending on chip size).
A few years ago a mate asked me to mentor his learning of photography. Despite his salivation over every wide, long and zoom he saw I insisted that for at least one year he should stick to the standard lens alone, my reasoning being that when he had learned to SEE photos in the first place, with his eyes, he would then be qualified to advance his techniques of capturing those photos with more kit. It worked, really, he's now a very accomplished amateur photographer and has a small but appropriate collection of lenses that match his needs and skills.
Sure, maybe a short zoom, around the 'standard' length will be helpful in various ways. But why complicate matters with yet another variable? You've got a hell of a lot to learn just to get going competently.
Best of luck to you. It's a great ride.
Click to expand...

I think I agree with your line of thought here. I feel pretty comfortable now with the idea of the kit lens, finding my feet with that first, then maybe upgrading it to a better quality optic thereafter. As I say, the only lens I may be tempted with to buy before then is a the 50mm prime as its so cheap and gives great results!

Thanks for your advice!
 
Hi Guys,

Rather than starting a new thread I thought I would update this one.

I work as an Architect for a housing developer and I approached the MD the other day with a proposition. I basically asked if the company could contribute to the purchase of my DSLR on the proviso that I go and take internal and external pictures of our sites once complete. A deal was struck, so I am very happy.

However, this means that I need to make sure I buy the camera with a lens that will be as comfortable in doors taking internal pictures of rooms as it would be out side taking street scenes.

I know the obvious answer is to buy two lenses, but I do still have a budget so I can't go mad. Plus I am new to DSLR photography so I would rather get used to the one lens first before buying more glass.

I have my heart set on the 60D and here are my options;

60D + 18-55mm IS II Lens
60D + 18-135mm IS Lens
60D + 17-85mm IS USM Lens
60D + 18-55mm and 55-250mm IS II Lenses

I am leaning towards either the kit lens or the 17-85 lens myself, but what do you guys think?

Any advice greatly appreciated!

Thanks,

Del
 
hmm I'm wondering if you would need wider than 17/18mm for indoor shots ? maybe something quite fast too due to low light ?

Tokina 11-16 f2.8 maybe ? would fit quite nicely against the lenses listed above.
 
17-85 out of all the lenses you've mentioned but Craft's probably correct in terms of wide angle.

A tripod and bounced flash will help you deal with low light scenarios
 
Yep, you'll need an UWA lens really, and a tripod. Flash would be good too.

To be honest you are probably better off getting a cheaper body and spending the money on lenses as having only a UWA is a bit limiting for anything else.
 
Nawty said:
Yep, you'll need an UWA lens really, and a tripod. Flash would be good too.

To be honest you are probably better off getting a cheaper body and spending the money on lenses as having only a UWA is a bit limiting for anything else.
Click to expand...

Yup, this sounds quite sensible, especially for your interior shots. I would think an UWA plus standard zoom would suit.

How about all secondhand:

Sigma 10-20mm goes for around £300
Canon 18-55mm around £70
Canon 50D around £530
 
Hi guys,

Thanks for your replies! I hear what you're all saying with regards to the wide angle lens.

I think I may be better off getting the body and a UWA lens through work and then buying a kit lens second hand!

Cheers,

Del
 
I use a Sigma 10-20mm UWA lens for any interia shots- works very well too

Les :thumbs:
 
Awesome, thanks Lez!

What's it like for landscape photography in your opinion?
 
Hi

:plusone: for the Sigma 10-20mm

If you have a look at my flckr account (see previous post earlier in thread), these internal shots were taken with it - i think you'll struggle with 17 mm as your widest from the kit lens.

Of the lenses you have listed with the 60D, I'd opt for the 17-85IS lens - I've one and get very good results with it. I can appreciate money plays a part, but it does work out cheaper to buy the lens with the body as a kit.
 
I would buy the 600d and put the money saved towards a 17-50mm f2.8 (ie Tamron) and a UWA.
 
Thanks for all the help guys.

I have spent a while researching and reading reviews on a whole range of lenses and I think I am going to go with the Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6. This lens seems to represent good value for money and I'm sure will be just fine for my requirements!

I will go with the 60D with the 18-55 kit lens and I think those will do me for a while!

Now all I am wondering is where to buy from. At the moment I am looking at Warehouse Express because they sell UK stock, they are competitively priced and, at they seem to give away some useful kit as a free gift! Although, I'm not sure whether to wait closer to Christmas and see if the prices drop lower?

Cheers,

Del
 
Once you've got to grips with the kit lens, I can heartily recommend the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-f4 as a great replacement, with or without OS. Pin sharp, fast and great bokeh and best of all LCE will do you a great deal and take your kit lens in PX.

Oh - and +1 for the Sigma ultrawide. I had both the constant and the f4-5.6 for interiors and they are both cracking lenses.
 
dellydel said:
Thanks for all the help guys.

I have spent a while researching and reading reviews on a whole range of lenses and I think I am going to go with the Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6. This lens seems to represent good value for money and I'm sure will be just fine for my requirements!

I will go with the 60D with the 18-55 kit lens and I think those will do me for a while!

Now all I am wondering is where to buy from. At the moment I am looking at Warehouse Express because they sell UK stock, they are competitively priced and, at they seem to give away some useful kit as a free gift! Although, I'm not sure whether to wait closer to Christmas and see if the prices drop lower?

Cheers,

Del
Click to expand...

Hi Dell

If you can stretch the extra £140, I'd go for the 17-85 as a kit lens

Don't forget to have a look here

http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/cat1.html

Gives a good referrance point for prices,

Will the prices drop lower towards Christmas, would like to hope so, but probably not :shrug: What may change is the "offers" of extras that you get with it
 
craig.walton2 said:
I would buy the 600d and put the money saved towards a 17-50mm f2.8 (ie Tamron) and a UWA.
Click to expand...

It depends on the photography you want to do also, the 600D is a good camera but, the frame rate is slow, it does not have a back screen that moves, which is great for low level and if you are into wildlive it han only shoot 30 frames as compared to the 60 continuous of the 60D.
 
cw318is said:
Once you've got to grips with the kit lens, I can heartily recommend the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-f4 as a great replacement, with or without OS. Pin sharp, fast and great bokeh and best of all LCE will do you a great deal and take your kit lens in PX.

Oh - and +1 for the Sigma ultrawide. I had both the constant and the f4-5.6 for interiors and they are both cracking lenses.
Click to expand...

Thanks, out of interest which of the Sigma UWA lenses do you think is the better in your opinion? Is the F4-5.6 the sharper of the two as the reviews seem to suggest?

andyred said:
Hi Dell

If you can stretch the extra £140, I'd go for the 17-85 as a kit lens

Don't forget to have a look here

http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/cat1.html

Gives a good referrance point for prices,

Will the prices drop lower towards Christmas, would like to hope so, but probably not :shrug: What may change is the "offers" of extras that you get with it
Click to expand...

Hi Andy, thanks for the info. With regards to the 17-85 lens, I have considered it, however, from what I have read it doesn't seem to be as good as the 18-55 in terms of sharpness and CA. So from for that reason I was thinking of going the the cheaper 18-55 and upgrading when I need to!
 
dellydel said:
With regards to the 17-85 lens, I have considered it, however, from what I have read it doesn't seem to be as good as the 18-55 in terms of sharpness and CA
Click to expand...

I'll agree with that

I sold my 17-85 on after being seriously under impressed with it compared to my cheaper 18-55 IS. As an example of the image quality of the 18-55 IS, I took all of the shots HERE barring the Mustang P51 [plane] with it

The Mustang P51 I took with the 55-250mm IS, a cracking lens for the price!

For the last 3 years I've only owned 3 lenses & they've all produced the goods when required, and they are:


  1. 50mm f/1.8
  2. 18-55mm IS Kit lens
  3. 55-250mm IS

Hope this helps ;)
 
Wow, some pretty impressive pics!

That is pretty much the kit list I think I will be working towards. Initially the 18-55 and a Sigma 10-20. Then most likely the 50mm, then the 55-250!

Cheers,

Del
 
JSER said:
It depends on the photography you want to do also, the 600D is a good camera but, the frame rate is slow, it does not have a back screen that moves, which is great for low level and if you are into wildlive it han only shoot 30 frames as compared to the 60 continuous of the 60D.
Click to expand...

The 600D DOES have a vari-angled screen. But you are right about it being great for low level photography.
 
craig.walton2 said:
The 600D DOES have a vari-angled screen. But you are right about it being great for low level photography.
Click to expand...

Does it, then go for it, if you can live with the slower frame rate and smaller buffer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top