Buying first DSLR lens...

I don’t mean to steal your thread, but:

Crozer, is this a decent lens + camera combo?

LandonWilson said
I don’t mean to steal your thread, but:

Crozer, is this a decent lens + camera combo?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16830120447

In short, yes. Good consumer mid-range camera with a versatile lens. Great price IMO , too.

+1 on the 50mm 1.8. Anyone interested in photography should have this lens.

crozer said
The standard ‘free’ lens, usually 18-55mm, which comes packed with almost every DSLR nowadays is really, really bad. It will help you get a grasp of photography if you are new to it, and it will of course allow you to delve into the fantastic features a DSLR offers. However, you can consider these lenses to be somewhat disposable lenses, as the materials they are made of and overall quality is much worse.

That said, if you do intend to get into photography (your wife for this matter) but are still quite new to it, I really recommend a 18-120mm lens. This won’t limit your photography to macro, portraits, zooms, etc. but will rather give you overall photography-capabilities.

Hope that helps
Oh and, since you bought a Canon, try to stay with a Canon lens. It tends to be that way: Nikkor for Nikon, Canon for Canon.

thanks for your input, my brother in law said the exact same about the kit lens, not worth the money will look into the lens you mentioned, thanks!

twi said
Everyone one needs a 50mm f/1.8, and it’s really cheap!

1.4 would be better, if you can’t actually go up to 1.2

bobocel said

twi said
Everyone one needs a 50mm f/1.8, and it’s really cheap!

1.4 would be better, if you can’t actually go up to 1.2

why would it be better?

You can’t have just one lens, you are too much limited. I recommande you a 50mm f1.8 for take picture of someone (portrait) and the price is very cheap 120$ , after a zoomlens like canon EFS 55 -250mm and a “normal” lens. With the T2I (Canon 550) you are supposed have a 17-50mm who is cheap. If you don’t have it buy a tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 it’s more expensive (around 400$-500$), but chosse tamron you will pay 450$ for a very great lens quality that you will pay 1000$ with canon.

MSFX said

bobocel said

twi said
Everyone one needs a 50mm f/1.8, and it’s really cheap!

1.4 would be better, if you can’t actually go up to 1.2

why would it be better?

1.4 and 1.2 would be a faster lens which would give you advantages in low light shooting. They also will give you some pretty sweet shallow depth of field with creamy bokeh. However, they are significantly more expensive than the 1.8.

I would recommend starting with the 1.8 and seeing how you like it. Later you can always spring for the 1.4 or 1.2.

bobocel said

twi said
Everyone one needs a 50mm f/1.8, and it’s really cheap!

1.4 would be better, if you can’t actually go up to 1.2

Better but not on the quality/price ratio… f/1.8 is affordable by everyone

KingDog said

MSFX said

bobocel said

twi said
Everyone one needs a 50mm f/1.8, and it’s really cheap!

1.4 would be better, if you can’t actually go up to 1.2

why would it be better?

1.4 and 1.2 would be a faster lens which would give you advantages in low light shooting. They also will give you some pretty sweet shallow depth of field with creamy bokeh. However, they are significantly more expensive than the 1.8.

I would recommend starting with the 1.8 and seeing how you like it. Later you can always spring for the 1.4 or 1.2.

Cheers dog