Gear Talk > Canon General

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

(1/7) > >>

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:

--- Quote from: AdrianAllen on December 02, 2012, 01:00:53 PM ---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?

--- End quote ---

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:

--- Quote from: neuroanatomist on December 02, 2012, 01:12:41 PM ---
--- Quote from: AdrianAllen on December 02, 2012, 01:00:53 PM ---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?

--- End quote ---
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.

--- End quote ---

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.


--- Quote from: wellfedCanuck on December 02, 2012, 01:47:41 PM ---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.

--- End quote ---

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:

--- Quote from: AdrianAllen on December 02, 2012, 03:07:28 PM ---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.

--- End quote ---

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.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version