what lens?

[jelimon]

so i've finally decided to lay my hands on a 50D but still undecided to get it with the kit lens or just the body with other lenses. Although I have handled DSLRs before, this will be my first purchase so I'm building the arsenal from scratch.

1. 18-200 mm

I will take plenty of landscapes but not sure how often i will need the zoom. the wide range is a nice to have feature especially since i'm going on vacation in new zealand soon. what is holding me back is the quality of the images - sharpness etc (not sure how such zoom lenses fare in this department) and the construction of the lens (flimsy? someone tore up his Nikon 18-200mm in one thread).

2. 17-55/85mm

To my amateur eyes, these two seems quite ok - I get the WA I want and a little bit of zoom. But reviews here and there don't seem to put these two high up in terms of image quality.

Being a newbie, I obediently went to the newbie's guide sticky and saw lots of other lenses that look reasonably priced but again spoiled for choices. And $$ is an issue here

Will appreciate any advice or opinions. To add on, I like taking people so the 50 mm f1.8 is a must for starters. Landscapes once in awhile and I'm still exploring what are the other subjects I like to capture. Thanks guys

[Headshotzx]

For #2, are you talking about the 18-55IS (kit1), 17-85IS (kit2) or 17-55f/2.8IS (S$1.4k)?

Best economical newbie setup: 50D + 18-55IS (buy as kit1) + 55-250IS (S$360) + 50mm f/1.8II (S$110, optional- if you want to shoot single portraits).

[Kit]

If money's an issue, then get a 40D instead. Its going for around $1300+. Its more than enough for a begineer to well....... begin. A good $700-800 dollars saved can be put into good use for lenses and other accessories e.g. a good sturdy tripod and head. Don't go economical on lenses. Most if not all contemporary lenses are built to handle normal usage. Things which do not usually happen happens because someone decided to go stupid with them.

Seems like the 17-55 fits the bill for you. It covers the range for both landscapes and portraits and still give you room to experiment with other genres till you decided to specialise in something else. Some might say it would not be wide enough for landscapes on a cropped body but its all in the mind most of the time. What's important is that you are able to work out a composition with the point of view you get with whatever lenses you have.

[estel]

if you shoot plenty of landscape and "not sure" how often you need zoom I guess 17-55 matches your needs. That way, you end up with a GOOD and fast lens as opposed to average lens. Not that 17-85 is a *bad* lens per se, but most likely you will end up with selling it for a better quality lens.

[jelimon]

Hi there, thanks for all your replies

headshotz: i'm talking about the kit lens, not the $1.4K one...

kit: money is an issue in the sense that i already have a budget in mind (about $3k) and would like to make the best out of it. initially i was considering the 40D as well, but for these reasons chose the 50D instead: 1) i don't foresee myself upgrading the body within the next 2-3 years so might as well get the newest model 2) the difference between a brand new 40D and 50D (both kits 1 and 2 or body only) for which i was quoted was only $400. of course one can argue that with $400 i can get a decent tripod or lens, and I do agree with that. But i don't want to be in want of something newer and better within one yr of purchasing the body.

I was quite keen on the 17-55mm but f5.6 for 55mm doesn't seem as attractive as the f1.8 50mm for about $100 more, so I've actually budgeted for the 50mm lens as well.

estel: what do you mean by fast lens? has it to do with the f-stop?

So seems like the 17-55mm it is, that's like a good $600 off the 18-200mm kit! Erm, tripod maybe??

[m3lv1nh0]

Yes, for a budget setup, get the $600++ Tamron 17-50f2.8(walkaround) + $130 501.8(low light portraits). Add a $600++ Sigma 10-20 if you are really into landscape. Also get a ext. flash($400-630) for events like birthday parties etc.

[m3lv1nh0]

Trust me, you would be glad to have f2.8 aperture. Faster AF and better keeper rate. Skip the kit lens!

[estel]

Originally Posted by jelimon estel: what do you mean by fast lens? has it to do with the f-stop?

yup. f/2.8 lets you have faster shutter speeds

not that you need fast lenses for landscape. You typically don't. But having a fast lens is useful in many other day to day conditions, and lets you have good bokeh when you need it, for instance portraits.

As melvin said, you may also have a look at 50 f/1.8 for aesthetic work and portraits, if you are into them. I haven't use tamron, but have heard people talk good about that lens too. External flash though I'm not so sure. Tripod is a good idea especially if you are in to landscape. Get a decent one and you won't regret the expense.

[jelimon]

Originally Posted by m3lv1nh0 Yes, for a budget setup, get the $600++ Tamron 17-50f2.8(walkaround) + $130 501.8(low light portraits). Add a $600++ Sigma 10-20 if you are really into landscape. Also get a ext. flash($400-630) for events like birthday parties etc.

ok, now getting even more spoilt for choices!

I would consider a proper WA lens when I'm ready to house the 50D and bring it underwater, but at the moment, dunno how steep my learning curve will be so would like to start with something manageable. With external flashes come a whole new aspect of photography and I dunno if I will make good use of the flash or not.

[tempdan]

i have only 1 comment: get the "best" lens that you can afford.

u can upgrade the body anytime (as technology get better)
but lens improvement are not that fast as the body.

get good lens then dont need to keep changing (buying and selling)

[jelimon]

Originally Posted by estel yup. f/2.8 lets you have faster shutter speeds not that you need fast lenses for landscape. You typically don't. But having a fast lens is useful in many other day to day conditions, and lets you have good bokeh when you need it, for instance portraits. As melvin said, you may also have a look at 50 f/1.8 for aesthetic work and portraits, if you are into them. I haven't use tamron, but have heard people talk good about that lens too. External flash though I'm not so sure. Tripod is a good idea especially if you are in to landscape. Get a decent one and you won't regret the expense.

i will definitely be getting a 50 f1.8. but between the tamron and the canon's, any difference? reason i'm asking is cos i've got a pretty good price for a brand new canon lens.

[estel]

Originally Posted by jelimon i will definitely be getting a 50 f1.8. but between the tamron and the canon's, any difference? reason i'm asking is cos i've got a pretty good price for a brand new canon lens.

in that case probably be biased to canon

As i said i don't have any experience with the Tamron to I don't know how much the difference is. have a look here
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography...50_review.html

and here
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=18572466

personally i tend to shun third party lenses for noise and feel reasons but that's just me. I don't even try to justify my taste.

[m3lv1nh0]

Originally Posted by jelimon i will definitely be getting a 50 f1.8. but between the tamron and the canon's, any difference? reason i'm asking is cos i've got a pretty good price for a brand new canon lens.

The Tamron is abit noisy and the zoom turns the opps direction of Canon but you will get used to it pretty fast. The f2.8 is the main selling point here. Brighter view finder, faster shutter speed for low light condition, better bokeh. It's also lighter and less than half the price of Canon 17-552.8IS. I'm sure beside shooting landscape, you would also like to do some street, portraits etc. The Tamron will serve you well here.

If you are really into landscape than I suggest getting Sigma 10-20 or Canon 10-22. 17mm is wide but it's just not wide enough. The view at 10mm is really fun.
Get a good tripod too. Flash can wait, still can use the on-board flash until you are sick of the deer in headlight look. Also can look at CPL, GND filters etc.. BBB virus!

[miniUltraman]

Originally Posted by tempdan i have only 1 comment: get the "best" lens that you can afford. u can upgrade the body anytime (as technology get better) but lens improvement are not that fast as the body. get good lens then dont need to keep changing (buying and selling)

buying and selling is part of the hobby/fun buy buy buy!!!

[jelimon]

Originally Posted by m3lv1nh0 The Tamron is abit noisy and the zoom turns the opps direction of Canon but you will get used to it pretty fast. Also can look at CPL, GND filters etc.. BBB virus!

newbie qn: i tot noise is more related to sensor/MP rather than lens? how does the lens contribute to noise in this case?

and CPL and GND filters are a must!!

[estel]

Originally Posted by jelimon newbie qn: i tot noise is more related to sensor/MP rather than lens? how does the lens contribute to noise in this case? and CPL and GND filters are a must!!

noise we refer to here is the audible noise of the lens motor. Its not a big deal really and anyway not a third-party only problem. Some canon lenses such as 50/1.8 and 75-300 have slow AF systems with noise.

[antacid]

uh, the TS is actually referring to the 18-55/3.5-5.6 kit lens and not the 17-55/2.8.

she's trying to decide whether to get the 18-55 or 17-85 kit options.

[Kit]

Originally Posted by jelimon kit: money is an issue in the sense that i already have a budget in mind (about $3k) and would like to make the best out of it. initially i was considering the 40D as well, but for these reasons chose the 50D instead: 1) i don't foresee myself upgrading the body within the next 2-3 years so might as well get the newest model 2) the difference between a brand new 40D and 50D (both kits 1 and 2 or body only) for which i was quoted was only $400. of course one can argue that with $400 i can get a decent tripod or lens, and I do agree with that. But i don't want to be in want of something newer and better within one yr of purchasing the body.

If you'd use the same mentality of the 50d on the 40d, then the 40D is good enough for you and if you have that mentality for the 50D, you'll end up buying the 60D. There's no end to buying the latest.

[jelimon]

Originally Posted by Kit If you'd use the same mentality of the 50d on the 40d, then the 40D is good enough for you and if you have that mentality for the 50D, you'll end up buying the 60D. There's no end to buying the latest.

actually i will be getting a 40D and a 50D. 50D for me and 40D for hubby.