Jump to content

What kind of lens should i get


JamesG

Recommended Posts

Probably more than any other factor, it depends on what kind of photography you wish to engage in: close up, landscape, architecture, portraiture, sports, fashion, photo reportage, wildlife - optimised lenses are available for each type of pursuit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to have a Canon non-digital SLR. I used a Canon-compatible Tamron zoom lens, can't remember the exact spec, 35 - 200? That's probably showing my ignorance!


It was reasonably light and easy to carry, very versatile, and took excellent pictures of people, landscapes etc when I went travelling.


It was also very reasonably priced.


ETA: And I only needed to carry one lens so didn't need to keep changing over lenses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got a Sigma 18-200mm lens for Canon - covers pretty much everything you could want for day to day photos. Quality is not quite as sharp as a Canon lens but more than adequate, and significantly cheaper at about ?250-300. At f3.5, you still need a reasonable amount of light although it's got optical stabilisation as well which helps a little bit.


Check out camerapricebuster for best prices - it's a specialist camera equipment price comparison site which keeps up to date with latest offers etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd suggest a 35mm-75mm lens (from experience). The problem with long zooms (up to 200mm) is that unless you pay a good whack for it you'll find loss of sharpness at the edges at some focal lengths and will always need a tripod. A 35-75 is more affordable and will give pretty good results at every zoom, whilst being versatile (and light) enough for landscapes through to snapshots and semi-close ups.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that the 50mm f1.8 is a great bit of kit for the price, but for versatility something like the 18-200mm is unbeatable. I basically use it for about 90% of the time now, with the 50mm on for the other 10%. It's surprisingly good at all focal lengths, and it's light enough that I very rarely need a tripod.


I would say that for a relative novice on a budget it's probably unbeatable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all fairness I do actually use my 24-70 f2.8 more than I use my prime, it's such a beautiful lens, the image quality is astounding, but it also weighs half a ton.

My 50 f1.4 died on honeymoon, the autofocus stopped working and if you're not composing a still life or something, autofocus is absolutely vital on those wide apertures.

Then all of a sudden it came back to life a couple of months ago for no particular reason. Colour me very happy indeed!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another vote for a 35mm 1.8 or 50mm 1.8 prime lens.

a) they're cheap

b) big max aperture, (so you can shoot indoors over the winter months without a flash) - blows the background out of focus so lovely for portraits

c) Check the reviews but you should find the 50mm 1.8 has pretty sharp optics

d) The fact you don't have a zoom will force you to think more closely about the composition of the shot, rather than just zooming away and snapping. (Nowt wrong with zooms, it's just nice to try something different sometimes)

e) Not too risky. If you buy the official Canon lenses you can use them for a few months and then flog them if you don't like them and you'll still get a decent resale price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The OP did ask for something other than a basic kit though, which is what prime lens are...basic kit. If you don't want to carry three lens then a zoom is the only answer. The short zoom is always going to give better results than a long zoom (photographic science was part of my degree) and prime lens (depending on the quality of the optics of course) will give even better results. The shorter the focal length the sharper all round a lens tends to be (for reasons of pure maths and physics). A decent 35-75mm though will still give excellent results at all focal lengths. No 200m zoom will keep it's properties, esp at 200m and esp at the edges of the lens. That's why wildlife photographers use primes...not zooms.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 'kit lens' the OP refers to is these days the general purpose lens that a DSLR ships with.


In the case of budget Canon DSLRs its the 18-55 f3.5-5.6

A good starter lens for learning composition and techniques, but the optics aren't good and image quality suffers significantly.


The 50 f1.8 is an excellent lens at a very cheap price. To get similar quality from a zoom would be minimum double, nay triple, the price, obviously as you say the trade-off is quality vs flexibility.


Also agree with avoiding the longer zooms, they cost ALOT for decent quality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what JamesG was saying is that he's got a Canon with a 'starter' kit lens, and he would like to see if he can move on to more creative and engaging photographs with a new lens.


If he's got a 40D, the he could have either one of the 'kit' lenses: theCanon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM or the Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM


If he's not an expert and if he's got either one of those then probably what he'd like is something that gives him a fundamentally different feel to the shot.


In that sense I'd be trying to recommend a lens that can deliver a shallow depth of field (a small f number) and still be sharp. Because he's low on budget it'll be difficult to get a good one with a zoom facility, so that effectively means he's going to be in 'prime' territory.


For that reason I'd plump firmly for the 50mm f1.4, and you can pick it up for around 250 quid.


I'm guessing Jimbo will derive an extremely pleasurable 6 months getting immersed in portrait and indoor flash free photography, and he'll have a lens that he can treasure for ever!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my experience (as a one-time professional), most photographers usually develop an interest in a particular subject or style and then acquire a lens that will facilitate their creative vision.


Buying a new lens merely in the hope that it will inspire some previously latent creativity seems rather forlorn to me - just my two cents' worth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The dustmen kindly broke my garden gate this morning,  so I am looking for a replacement.  I could make a complaint to the council, however I know I will have to prove it and provide a receipt,  both I can't provide. Many thanks. 
    • My front gate has expired! Does anyone have an unwanted one - ideally wrought iron? Many thanks. 
    • Do also remember that, whilst this is the original there is an unrelated FB presence with a (very) similar name, which might also be prayed in aid. 
    • Yet another increase, its absolutely disgusting. I was charged £7.95 to send documents recorded delivery last week. I asked for the Signed for option that only costs £2.50 but the Post Office refused & said they would only send them recorded delivery. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...