Options
Buying your first SLR - DSLR
Ok, I know there has been a similar thread but the advice I am after is slightly different and as follows:
I have just about decided (90%, 10% pending on the bank manager!) to upgrade from my prosumer model to a DSLR.
I'm leaning more towards the Canon 350d over the Nikon D70S or D50 due to reviews that I have read and the value for money that it seems over here in the UK.
Budget £1000.
My main Q is what lenses should I be looking at as a novice. I can get the XT rebel for £600 with 18-55mm EF-S lens (starter kit) or approx £800 with additional 55-200mm EF-S & BG-E3 grip.
With no experience of SLR cameras and interchangeable lenses I'm not sure on the differences between lenses. I will be looking to do plenty of macro as my prosumer was good at these and is something I have enjoyed, as well as portraits and some nature/landscapes. I've seen a good budget telephoto, Sigma APO Macro super 70-300mm.(£140) Does this mean this will cater well for macro shots and long distance shots, and if so is there any need to get the original 18-55mm lens? I've also come across the Canon 60mm macro with good reviews and I am starting to get confused with the whole mm 60, 70-300 etc etc. Is it just the higher the number the closer and longer the lens can focus? If that is so then why is the 60mm a macro and the 18-55 not, or is it?? arghhh(begins to pull hair out!) I'm really not sure on what differences all these ranges have, due to owning a prosumer that just zooms in and out to its limitations. Which is 6xoptical, 3.2xdigital, 32-210mm.
What with so much new lingo to learn, the smaller the number the wider the aperture, everything in stops, compensation this and compensation that, JPEGS v's RAW, and a fresh copy of Photoshop on the doorstep waiting to be learned from scratch. It gets confusing at the best of times. So your help is much appreciated.
So all in all what's the good starter range that people would recommend?
I'm hoping to keep the budget within £800, leaving £200 for a reasonable tripod with a cheap head (this i can update later funds allowing) :scratch :scratch :scratch
I have just about decided (90%, 10% pending on the bank manager!) to upgrade from my prosumer model to a DSLR.
I'm leaning more towards the Canon 350d over the Nikon D70S or D50 due to reviews that I have read and the value for money that it seems over here in the UK.
Budget £1000.
My main Q is what lenses should I be looking at as a novice. I can get the XT rebel for £600 with 18-55mm EF-S lens (starter kit) or approx £800 with additional 55-200mm EF-S & BG-E3 grip.
With no experience of SLR cameras and interchangeable lenses I'm not sure on the differences between lenses. I will be looking to do plenty of macro as my prosumer was good at these and is something I have enjoyed, as well as portraits and some nature/landscapes. I've seen a good budget telephoto, Sigma APO Macro super 70-300mm.(£140) Does this mean this will cater well for macro shots and long distance shots, and if so is there any need to get the original 18-55mm lens? I've also come across the Canon 60mm macro with good reviews and I am starting to get confused with the whole mm 60, 70-300 etc etc. Is it just the higher the number the closer and longer the lens can focus? If that is so then why is the 60mm a macro and the 18-55 not, or is it?? arghhh(begins to pull hair out!) I'm really not sure on what differences all these ranges have, due to owning a prosumer that just zooms in and out to its limitations. Which is 6xoptical, 3.2xdigital, 32-210mm.
What with so much new lingo to learn, the smaller the number the wider the aperture, everything in stops, compensation this and compensation that, JPEGS v's RAW, and a fresh copy of Photoshop on the doorstep waiting to be learned from scratch. It gets confusing at the best of times. So your help is much appreciated.
So all in all what's the good starter range that people would recommend?
I'm hoping to keep the budget within £800, leaving £200 for a reasonable tripod with a cheap head (this i can update later funds allowing) :scratch :scratch :scratch
0
Comments
lots to learn, stick around here you'll get plenty
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
As to a 2nd lens on a budget i would not go past the 70-200 L f/4.
Gus
Shay.
There's tons to learn so take your time. A friend once told me the kit lens is underrated and I have come to agree. Learn the basics and then you will be more informed when it comes to deciding what your next lens should be.
skip the kit lens. pick up a sigma 18-125 and a 35/2. that will give you alot of range (28-200mm in fact, quite the same as many prosumers, including your own). stick with that lens until you can nail down what range you shoot the most in.
the 18-125 is by all accounts a decent walkaround lens. at least better than the kit lens, with a much better range... and not much more cash.
the 35/2 will be a fast, decent low light prime for you to start out with. the 50/1.8 is also an option, but its a little long on a 1.6 body. but i think that every DSLR owner needs a fast prime... after all, DSLRs are in all their glory in low light ya know.
just my opinion.
It is a very cheap lens, to the point it becomes a no brainer when you see how sharp and bright it is. If you can't afford really good glass then this will help you get by when you need the best quality you can (or in very low light)
Also for a wide angle on a budget (if you are skipping the kit lens) you can't go past the sigma 15-30, alllllmost as sharp as the Canon 17-40L but half the price (though it feels like twice the weight and size as the Canon.)
Absolutely grab the 50 f/1.8 but for the price i will also always have my kit lens. A lot of people knock it but its dirt cheap & if i am anywhere that im concerned about my good lens's getting harmed then i whack it on.
If i was on a budget then these 2 cheap lenses & a 2nd hand 70-200 f4 would be all my kit would need. The 70-200 will also work well with a generic 1.4TC giving you 448 mm considering cropping.
Sample of the 18-55 kit lens...
Lots of good advice here. I'm particular to the kit lens and learn answer
Andy gave. You'll learn so much by shooting with just one lens. More about
composition but also getting to know your new camera.
Once you have an idea what you want to shoot, then look for additional
lenses. That way you'll end up with kit you're more likely to use.
Best of luck in your choice and once you've made it, post the result.
Ian
thanks
DRebel (300D) - 18-55mm 'kit' - 70-200mm f/4 - 35mm f/2
Plus grip, cheap-o Quantaray 2x TC, kenko extension rings, nice HD tripod, etc etc..
What would I do differently? Me, I'd get the Rebel (probably the XT-350D at this point) and 18-55 kit lens. If I wanted to do tele work (and I probably would) I'd go for the 55-200. The 70-200/4 is a sweet lens, but the 55-200 is quite usable, especially for the noobie, and is like 1/3 the price.
Lenswise, that's ALL I'd get for a while. Experiment w/ that setup by itself for a while. Eventually add a 'good', bright prime. But don't do this until you experiment as much as possible and figure out what you like to shoot. If it's normal/macro-esqe stuff, the 50/1.8 is probably a helluva buy. Me, I opted for the 35/2 because I was adicted to my 50/2 on my Pentax film rig. 50mm just didn't do it for me on th 1.6x crop. Landscapers won't be happy unless they're looking through something wider than normal (ie wider than 35 on a 1.6x camera). Bird folks will want to save their pennies for a longer lens. Point being, YMMV, wait until you know what you want to do before you spend the money. The kit + 55-200 will cover a lot of bases until you learn the ropes.
Oh, and I'd skip the grip on a 'normal' sized camera like the DRebel (300D) or 20D. I can't comment on the importance of a grip on the smaller XT (350D)