Question
After quite a time I have made my mind to buy a DSLR and I am thinking for Canon 550D. Though question is long I could not find way to shorten this.
As a starter I would like to stick and learn with the basic lens which comes which is 18-55 IS. However my confusion is mounting especially looking at the range of the lenses.
Though photography is my hobby but I would like to take it real seriously. Not sure if I will choose/happen to make money with hobby [till now] (to buy or afford big heavy equipment)
So to upgrade the to new lens in future follwoing thoughts are bouncing in my head after some investigation ...
Canon 55-250 IS :
Why : Comparitively less expensive and can fullfill my requirement to reach distance so that I won't be upset not being able to shoot object at distance.
Questions: will be be able to deliver nice clean shopts (Like pro) ? Or its just toy to satisfy amature photographers need to do some wildlife and birds photography ?
Canon 70 - 300 :
Why : Little upgrade which can get me power to reach some more distace ... hopefully not too expensive.
Question : Same as above + which one has the better results and reliable ?
Other options I was thinking was to buy EF lenses timely one by one ....so that in case I upgrade to full frame they can be useful. I heard that they have real good picture quality and they truly worth their value. Is that true? In that case
Canon 20 - 70 MM IS USM :
Why: Good expensive ... I thought it would satisfy my need of general lens and still produce excellent results.
Quesion : Is my expectation from this lens correct ?
Then I will think to buy zoom lens for wildlife,
Canon 100-400 4.5 IS USM:
Why: I heard it's a good lens and can be handy in wild life
Question : Does this really stand for providing good quality images ? Or it's just big bucks one has to pay for not really good results?
I am also interested to try Macro photography. So thinking to buy one macro lense in future though I heard Close-up kits could be handly inexpensive but macro lens does really makes the difference so
Canon 100 2.8 IS USM:
Why: I donts want 68 mm lens in this family as it looks too short and don't want 180 mm lens looks too expensive. So this deal appears to be a win-win situation.
Question: is my understanding corrent ? or it's just Close UP kit could make all different with any of above mentioned Zoom lenses and no need for special Macro lens ?
Now the following lens really got my eyes wide open. But just that is too expensive. Canon 70-200 2.8 IS USM:
Why: I would like to experience the magic of 2.8 on 200mm. I think this could produce exceptional results in wild and fashion. It could be a nice friend with the above mentioned Canon 20-70.
Question: Is it worth spending on this lens ? Or 100-400 will prove better and sufficient than this ?
So as per all above talk I could have following sets
1) Economic as amateur:
18-55 IS + 55-250 mm OR
18-55 IS + 70-300 mm
2) Expensive investment done for long term good results and returns 18-55 IS + 55-250 mm Then buy
20-70 2.8 IS USM Then buy
100-400 4.5 IS USM OR 70-200 2.8 IS USM
3) Expensive investment done for long term good results and returns
18-55 IS + 55-250 mm Then buy
20-70 2.8 IS USM Then buy
100-400 4.5 IS USM OR 70-200 2.8 IS USM Then buy
100 2.8 IS USM Macro
I have not given thougths on other lenses available in market as some said Tamron 18 - 290 is solution to all problems. Or some say Sigma too is good. Not sure of it either ?
Please have your opinion and let me know your thoughts and comments on how should I proceed.
Answer
Well my suggestion is this - don't plan your lens purchases too far out in the future, especially if you don't have any idea of what you'll like to be shooting. There's many a photographer in the world who will never want or need a 100-400mm 4.5. Or you may find yourself wanting something wider and get an ultrawide (which doesn't appear on your list).
If it were me, considering you're still new, I'd get a 18-55mm, a 70-300mm, and a 50mm f/1.8 (which doesn't make your list). This is probably a bit contrary to some common advice of 'buy the absolute best lenses you can to start out' - but, to me, this is only really sound advice if you know what lenses you want! This suggested setup gives you the focal lengths to play with and figure out which one you actually want before you lay out the dough for something like a 70-200mm f/2.8 (the lens many of us drool over). It also doesn't break the bank, as far as lenses go.
The 50mm f/1.8 (a 'nifty fifty') is an important lens to learn with. Prime lenses (ones that don't zoom) help you think more about composition because you have to physically move your feet. The fast aperture of f/1.8 lets you do more in available light and can give you a short depth of field, creating subject isolation (subject in focus, background blurred out). It's a lens to help hone your creative skills on.
When you go to upgrade, you'll know what focal range you find yourself using.
- Do you find yourself hovering in the "normal" range? Then go for the 24-70mm f/2.8.
- Do you find yourself going after wildlife and wanting something longer? Try the 100-400mm or a the 70-200 f/2.8 with a teleconverter.
- Do you find yourself constantly at the wide end of your 18-55mm? Then go for the ultrawide.
- Are most of your shots portraits? Try the 70-200mm f/2.8.
- Wishing you could get super close up to those flower and bees? Try a 100mm macro.
Right now you could plan to spend quite a bit of money on a lens that you may never use. Learn a bit and then figure out which lens suits the kind of photographer you are.
Check more discussion of this question.
No comments:
Post a Comment