Sinar M

Buy whatever is within your budget that makes you happy. Apply this to all walks of life, and enjoy yourself.

For some, this means an unnecessarily fast car. For others, this means unnecessarily fancy clothing. For us lot, it usually means unnecessarily expensive lenses.

Hi Todd,


Clear story and I think you're right. I had those questions also when I started (just stept over from pocket powershot S50 to a Nikon D70S), and what a suprise I was abble to switch lenses.

But what did I want? Two things, close-up (Macro) and a great(er) range. Then the problems start. What kind of brand to chose? They (Tamron-Sigma-Nikon-Tokina) all have Macro and Tele lenses.

That is the place where I stand.


Regards

Ernst

For those who are still like Enrst and trying to decide on what brand to select from, my advice is to go to your local camera shop and try out a few different brands. Put them on your camera and take some comparison photos for closer examination when you get home.

Try to get the "feel" for how brand A compares to brand B when you are shooting.

Do you like the "feel" or operation of one better than the other? Does one look better than the other when you examine your photos?

This is even true for the same brand. Many brands have two or three lines of lenses. A cheap, medium and expensive line. Test those out too.

It's not a quick or easy process, especially for folks just starting out.

It's not a quick or easy process, especially for folks just starting out.

No, but that's what makes it fun, isn't it? It's not like I have a lot of free time on my hands, but I do like to go to the shop from time to time to get an idea of what everyone on these forums is talking about. Luckily enough for me, the wife likes to try stuff out to. Sorta like a saturday outing for us =)

Parts of it are nice an snappy but then parts get boring and the points get laboured.

Excellent points though ~ right on the money!

Well, I am a newbie and Todd, this is indeed a great post.. the car analogy smoothly drove the nail into my head :-)..

I would like to add some more pointers to this post .I think one of the most important think for a newbie if to observe!! I really like seeing great pictures in this forum and elsewhere, but what I love is to see what lens and in particular what "mm" that particular shot is taken. That gives the single most information to a newbie as what to expect at that particular focal length… Also, many folks have some sort or other experience with fixed lens P&S cameras and have somewhat reasonable entry level understanding about distances and stuff.

From seeing many excellent photos here and elsewhere, I realize that I like nice wide landscapes more than anything. Some more time researching photos from such lenses, I know getting a wide angle lens will be a somewhat safe bet.

This I feel is better than getting a 50mm and figuring it out in the first 10-15 shots! But there is another reason for getting a starter prime lens and that is that the concerned individual can then concentrate on all other parameters associated with photography. Getting to know what shutter speed, aperture, exposure etc. is used in what situation is the most important aspect of learning photography. The lenses and its mm will all follow naturally later.

To sum it up, I would wish that the moderator enforce the rule that all snaps posted should have thee focal length and other parameters mentioned… focal length at the very least.

But I am a total newbie who is going to buy my first DSLR (Canon Rebel XT (black)) tomorrow … what do I know

Of course I read this after my posting asking what lens to buy. DUH!

I have to throw my 2 cents in since everyone else has thrown in at least a quarter.
When i first got my camera i bought a 28-70 cheapo sigma and a 70-300 cheapo sigma. Were they the greatest lenses in the world, god no. but with the right care and concentration on my shots i was able to get some good shots (good in my opinion).
After i ran through about 5000 shots, problably alot more, before i broke out and bought some new glass. I shot alot of WIDE and then i shoot alot of tele. My friends joke with me that i only need a 15mm, a 50mm and a 400mm. But i'm glad i waited it saved me alot of money and gave me time to research alot of lenses.

Todd was dead on, with what you should do.
I suggest buy some lenses that are border line disposable that will give you a good shot but buy the 2 zooms for less then $300.
What do i tell my art students? Get a 17-85 or something similiar and then get a 70-XXXmm.

Well thats my 2 cents.

First lens - 50 f/1.8
Second - 70-200 f/4L
And thus began a series of acquisitions that have been ongoing to today....

(of course, once I started getting paid to shoot with frequency... I had to tailor my lens choices to what exactly I was shooting-- that is: if I wasn't doing this for $$, I'd have a different lens lineup).

R

Have the 16-35 for it's wide angel, high quality and performance

The 85L for it's speed sharpness and of course Bokeh

The 70-200 2.8 for it's versatility

The 200 1.8 for it's bleeding sharpness, speed and Bokeh

And the 500 4.5 for it's small size and power

What a great post that should be pasted to the top of the forum page.

Todd,
That's one of the most helpful posts I've seen in a long time. This should indeed be required reading!

Andy

Excellent advice in this post. But I think there is an additional issue to consider- weight. Assuming that you buy an inexpensive lens, then add appropriate lenses given your budget and requirements, I think it is important to consider the weight of your lens portfolio.

I have both primes (35, 50, 85, 100 macro, 135) and zooms (17-40, 24-85, 24-70, 70-200, 1.4X multiplier) and I realized that it was extremely undesirable to carry everything around. I was forced to put together a matrix that allowed me to figure out what to carry given the photographic situation and the number of lenses I was going to allow myself (particularly when hiking or flying).

All these comments are probably obvious once you have bought your collection of lenses, but it is not as obvious if get seriously involved in building a lens collection.

Doing some analysis in advance of the amount of weight and type of camera bag you are willing to carry will, I think, save people a lot of money. I am sure I am not the only person that has ended up with a number of photography bags and backpacks as the number of lenses has expanded.

Hello everyone I joined yesterday.

I enjoyed your post, Todd. It reminds me of an Aristotle Axiom I hold near and dear
"What we have to learn to do, we learn by doing."

As a working pro for 20+ years I would agree with and fully support your analytical approach.

However as a photo educator I don't necessarily give the same advise to all students IE to go cheap. Although I certainly understand your point. Especially those who are looking for a starting point and general information to make that initial purchase.

My point here is to briefly discuss the benefits and importance of fast lenses and why regardless of focal length one should consider investing in the fastest lenses you can afford.

The new photographer as well as the experienced life long shooter will alway benefit from remembering photography literally means writing with light.

Without light we can not make photographs.

Soon after we learn how to make an exposure we should also learn that the viewing aperture is not necessarily the taking aperture.

In addition, without sufficient light we can not see well enough to compose or execute exposures requiring precise timing IE whether the image is about a rapidly moving subject or a subtle fleeting smile in a portrait.

Most nubies don't realize when looking thru a lens that the viewing aperture may vary depending on the focal lenth selected with most inexpensive zooms.

I've found even those who have been shooting for awhile are astounded when they look thru a fast lens (of comparable FL to their own) and experience the ease and joy of seeing the world with twice or four times as much light (or more).

As we age it is Mother Natures dark side that requires us to need more and more light to see.

As developing photographers we soon realize discover why magic light is so aptly named and learn the frustrations and limitations of trying to capture images with slow lenses/film/eyes.

Fast lenses are the answer.

As Dumbledore said to Harry Potter "It's choices you make Harry" that determine what your photo will look like IE combinations of camera settings (shutter and aperture) we call equivalent exposures....fast lenses allow greater variety choices in a greater variety of lighting conditions.

Now we all can't afford pro lenses but there are choices to be made in terms of available lens speed if you are willing to step (invest) outside the "kit lens." Every stop increased lets in twice the light.....

I feel the lens is far more important than the camera.

Prioritizing quality glass before the camera body especially in today digital world where cameras certainly have nowhere near the shelf life they did in the days of celluloid is a wize investment.

Most likely we will all upgrade our cameras, it's inevitable since digital is still a rapidly deveoping technology. You'll keep a good lens for a much much longer time making economic sense................................. to buy once is cheaper then the alternative.

Learning thru analysis is implicit to the process of photography.

Enjoying the process...... is directly correlated to growth and improved product!

For me the more I can see the more enjoyable the process is. The more choices I have regarding exposure the less limited I feel creativly.

Great imagery transends equipment. Fast lenses give you additional choices.

In the end you are absolutely correct choosing a lens is subjective based on analysizing ones needs and budget.

I totally agree with catsailor's post above. I am a newbie and I am the guy everyone likes to make fun of since I ran out and bought the equipment first. I wanted to buy something that would allow me to take shots in low light and something that I know I could keep for a life time if I wanted. Have you ever just known that there is something you want to do and yet you put it off for years? I have always had a love for photography and I just got tired of using my P & S.

I am very new to this but I am amazed at how much more time I want to spend now that I have a nice base of 2 lens that can shoot most of the shots that I find myself in when in the field. I feel like an addict. This forum has really allowed me to learn a lot and I find myself reading a lot more than I post.

To show you how new I am, I thought the IS would keep me from needing a tripod. Well after 2000 shots now I quickly found out that I was wrong. I must say that buying the best lens I could afford makes me want to shoot more.

I'm one of the people who had no idea what to get, and went for maximum range initially. My 28-300 Tamron was amazing initially. The range it allowed me was just fantastic, but to be honest, I learnt my most valuable lesson ever from that lens. I'm greatful I bought the lens, but I'm also greatful, that I learnt what I did from it.
For me now, higher levels of light are far more important. That said, I do believe we all need to learn somewhere.

I think that if you are just starting out, you won't be able to get a good feel for how the lenses will work with the style that you will develop simply by trying it out in the store. Ideally, if you can borrow lenses and try them out for a day it will help you out a lot, but that is not always possible. My advice for beginners is if you only buy one lens, and can't try them out first, get a mid-range zoom like a 28-90 or a 17-85. Often they come with the camera in a kit, and although the kit lenses are not the best quality, they will help you learn what to look for in a lens, without the financial gamble. If you find yourself using the wider range of the zoom more often, buy a wider lens next time. If you find yourself zooming in, buy a longer length next time. Or, if you are willing to spend the money, opt for a higher quality mid range zoom instead of the kit lens and you will likely be happy both learning with it, and using it as your default lens once you have the hang of it. I know a lot of people will disagree with me on this, but that is how many photographers I know learned about lenses when starting out. As for everything else other than focal length, Todd's post is definatly good advice.

One thing I'd like more people to do is recommend which lens "not" to get. Reading reviews on the Sigma 24-70 seemed pretty good so I got it. Realized later on that most people that liked it were using it on a Nikon where it seems to work better. I'm on Canons. It's coming back from Sigma tomorrow. Hopefully it's sharpened up some and focusing better. Have to count on it for a couple of weddings now.

I still won't hesitate to recommend the 50 1.8 though. As cheap as it is, it can let people see the capabilities inherent in their cameras. I'm sure some people geta DSLR with the kit lens and eventually get rid of it cause the pictures never live up to their expectations. All camera shops should give customers listings of sites like this and convince them into signing on and actually learning about their camera and lens'.

I took a photography 101 course in college (30 years ago) to fill up a required elective. My professor would not let us shoot with anything other than a 50mm (either f1.4 or f1.8). His reasoning was simplicity (read no zooms) and the fact that a 50mm has a focal length similar to the human eye. I needed to know what to expect out of that lens in EVERY situation before I even brought the camera up to my eye - compositionally, focus, depth of field, and exposure. I got to know that camera and lens so well (remember, this was the day of auto nothing) I could usually set the shutter speed and aperture correctly solely from experience. You get the point. Newcomers to photography would be well served by setting their cameras to full manual, use one fixed length lens, and learn them inside and out.

One thing that is often overlooked in this era of web based learning and photography is the development of your photographic vision through critique sessions. Sitting down with a good size group of people and a good instructor for weekly critique sessions is invaluable. I am not against the web as a learning tool (I write financial software for a living and use the web extensively) but it cannot replace a formal photo critique session.

If you are new to photography, look into a college course or maybe a course given by a good, local photographer. I did more work in my photo course than I did in Organic Chemistry and enjoyed every minute, both in and out of class.

Smart!
Should it be a 60mm F2.8 AF Micro Nikkor?
It should make a nifty 90mm portrait lens on digital.