soon to be a 'Canon/DSLR newbie' here!

[AdrianAllen]

Hi guys. Just like the title says, i'm going to be a future owner of my first SLR. Coming from a P&S background, I had the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ18 for about 5yrs I think. I had no training whatsoever in taking pictures(taking indoor stuff/landscapes/nightscapes/people generally those who/things doesn't mind being taken a picture of. I'd love to start taking street photography though). And at often times I take videos with friends.  With that said, I've decided to get a 60d for my first one.

I know this will not be new to everyone, but i'm really having a hard time choosing what lens should I start off with. I'm stuck in between the 18-135mm kit lens or 50mm f1.4 because their price difference is only about 100euros. 60d kit (18-135mm) = 1000euro. 60d body only + 50mm f1.4 = 1100euro

Questions, 1) image quality wise, which of the two excel? 2) which would be better in low light or bright light? 3) Will I be missing out on the reach of the 18-135mm (close-ups/ tele) IF I do decide to get the 50mm f1.4?

Any input would be highly appreciated. THANKS!

[neuroanatomist]

Questions, 1) image quality wise, which of the two excel? 2) which would be better in low light or bright light? 3) Will I be missing out on the reach of the 18-135mm (close-ups/ tele) IF I do decide to get the 50mm f1.4?

1) The 50/1.4 will have better IQ when stopped down narrower than f/2.

2) The 50/1.4 will be better in low light - it lets in ~4 to 16 times as much light as the zoom lens. But...shooting at f/1.4 also means a very shallow depth of field, especially if your subject is close.

3) Yes, you'll probably miss the reach. You'll almost certainly miss the wide end, particularly since you mention shooting indoors.

I'd get the 18-135mm kit lens, and consider the cheaper 50/1.8 initially - versatility of a zoom plus low light capability of a fast prime for a reasonable cost.

[wellfedCanuck]

Welcome to the forum.

Neuro answered your questions, but I have one for you: have you considered the latest Rebel versus the 60D? Generally, the T4i's about $300 cheaper than the 60D, the features are in the same league and both cameras will produce about the same image quality. If you become serious about photography- you're likely going to upgrade from either of these models, anyway. The T4i would get you started and leave something in the budget for lenses or other accessories.

[AdrianAllen]

Questions, 1) image quality wise, which of the two excel? 2) which would be better in low light or bright light? 3) Will I be missing out on the reach of the 18-135mm (close-ups/ tele) IF I do decide to get the 50mm f1.4?

I'd get the 18-135mm kit lens, and consider the cheaper 50/1.8 initially - versatility of a zoom plus low light capability of a fast prime for a reasonable cost.

I got a little confused here. You praised the 50/1.4 at almost all the questions. but still pointed me back at the kit lens? And i've heard that the it's better to get the 1.4 compared to the 1.8 since it only has a bit of difference in price.

Neuro answered your questions, but I have one for you: have you considered the latest Rebel versus the 60D? Generally, the T4i's about $300 cheaper than the 60D, the features are in the same league and both cameras will produce about the same image quality. If you become serious about photography- you're likely going to upgrade from either of these models, anyway. The T4i would get you started and leave something in the budget for lenses or other accessories.

Thanks! Yes I did consider getting the 650d/t4i first. But it was kinda small, and looking at Canons releases of rebels, they release a new one every year. With my buying pattern, I don't think I will be getting another one in about 5yrs time so I decided to get the higher end one.

[neuroanatomist]

I got a little confused here. You praised the 50/1.4 at almost all the questions. but still pointed me back at the kit lens? And i've heard that the it's better to get the 1.4 compared to the 1.8 since it only has a bit of difference in price.

Well, yes...that's exactly what I did.  The best choice would be to get the 18-135 and the 50/1.4. But I wasn't sure that was viable from a cost standpoint.  Even better would be the 15-85mm lens and the 50/1.4. Plus a good tripod for nightscapes.  Or the 5DIII and several L lenses. Just stop me when the cost gets too high...

My point was that the 18-135 + 50/1.8 is in the price range under discussion (a little less than the 60D + 50/1.4, I believe), not a couple hundred € extra.

Here's the thing - the 50/1.4 may offer slightly better IQ, but how much will that help if you hit the wall of the room before you can back up far enough to frame your shot?

Since you're talking about an APS-C camera, having just a 50mm lens means your only lens behaves as a short telephoto lens.  Now, if you stated you were getting this setup solely to shoot portraits, I'd say the 60D + 50/1.4 would be great. But for, "indoor stuff/landscapes/nightscapes/people (and) street," if you're going to have one lens, a zoom is a better choice.  A normal prime would possibly be ok (like a Sigma 30/1.4).  But not a short tele prime, IMO.

[RS2021]

I'd get the 18-135mm kit lens, and consider the cheaper 50/1.8 initially - versatility of a zoom plus low light capability of a fast prime for a reasonable cost.

+1
Yes, when it is a new venture, you want to have versatility the most so you don't sour soon or feel frustrated... being stuck with one focal length will do that to most people. You will find the 50mm rather tough in cramped spaces. Plus, on the crop-sensor it is not even a "normal" lens really, it is a "portrait lens" and will not be wide enough for kids running around indoors. With the zoom, you may have to work on the higher ISO end but 60D will do ok within limits here.

Hands down I will go with the zoom first and then expand out to primes. Else you may feel a tad cramped

Edit: Dang! Neuro covered the portrait lens part as I was typing.

[neuroanatomist]

Just to add - if you've got the budget for the 60D, 18-135 kit, and 50/1.4, you might still be better off getting the 50/1.8...and a 430EX II.  Yes, the 60D has a built-in flash...but nothing says point-and-shoot snapshot like the popup flash. It's great for fill light outdoors, but as a main flash indoors, a 430EX II bounced off the ceiling will look a lot better.

[jondave]

Welcome to the club, you're on your way to becoming a poor man.

Get the longest zoom you can find, I would say even a third party 18-270mm. IQ should be the least of your concerns, anything you get will have better IQ than your P&S. Since you're just starting out you'll need flexibility and range, the zoom gives you so much freedom to develop your style.

[Marsu42]

Neuro answered your questions, but I have one for you: have you considered the latest Rebel versus the 60D? Generally, the T4i's about $300 cheaper than the 60D, the features are in the same league

... but not the usability, the larger size, the lcd screen and back dial make a large difference in handling (at least to me).

[2n10]

Welcome and congrats.  Read your manual and take shots of averything you can with multiple settings.  Digital pics are real cheap.

[AdrianAllen]

Well, yes...that's exactly what I did.  The best choice would be to get the 18-135 and the 50/1.4. But I wasn't sure that was viable from a cost standpoint.  Even better would be the 15-85mm lens and the 50/1.4. Plus a good tripod for nightscapes.  Or the 5DIII and several L lenses. Just stop me when the cost gets too high...

  Well that escalated quickly. And yes, that's obviously out of the question. maybe if I decide to sell me liver in the near future, i'd get that setup. At the moment, I only have the resources to get 18-135 OR 50/1.4. Really thanks for the input. That made me really rethink about my choices

You're right there, the kit lens+50/1.8 would cost less

EDIT:
Hmmm 15-85mm? It costs around 800$(750euro) Wouldn't there be an L lens in that price range? *Not planning to buy one soon, just curious.*

Welcome to the club, you're on your way to becoming a poor man.

What a nice way to welcome a newbie LOL! A little bit depressing if you think about it, but still.. LOL!

... but not the usability, the larger size, the lcd screen and back dial make a large difference in handling (at least to me).

My thoughts exactly. Since I'm coming from a P&S cam, I would love to at least get out of the P&S feel of the cam. I've tested my GF's dslr, which is BTW a Nikon 3100(yes I know, conflict of interest, but still.. ) and it was too small for me, and was almost the same size as my former camera. Wasn't for me.

[verysimplejason]

Do you see yourself getting more serious about photography?  Why not go directly to FF?  If you have the money, you can go for a 6D or 5D2 for just a little bit more.  If not, go for a 5D classic.  5D + 50mm F1.4 + flash will go a long way.  You can add lenses as you go.  If you see yourself going FF sometime soon, don't waste your money on an APS-C body and lens.  Just my 2 cents.

[Sony]

Welcome to the club, you're on your way to becoming a poor man.

You're right! I'am poorer after getting married with Canon.
But I'am happier.

[PeterJ]

I'd agree with advice so far of the 18-135mm for versatility and a 50/1.8. The other thing would be to get the zoom first, dial-in to 50mm and see how you like that focal length. My first DSLR was was a 450D with a kit lens and I used that to work out which focal lengths I liked before bankrupting myself on other lenses . Personally I did really like 50mm on a crop, and a 50/1.4 was my first non-kit lens but I wouldn't have been happy with it as a single lens.

For low-light you could also consider a Yongnuo flash which is roughly similar cost to the 50/1.8. I've only used Canon flashes myself but a lot of people here seem to be enthusiastic about them, especially considering the cost versus a Canon speedlite.

[jondave]

You're right! I'am poorer after getting married with Canon.
But I'am happier.

I believe it's an affair you have with Canon, not marriage. Marriage is supposed to make you poorer AND miserable.