First of all, I'm new in SLR photography. I'm planning on buying Rebel XT. I did some research on this site as well on others and decided not to go with the kit lens. I want to have some wide range lens (something 17-80, 17-125) but up to this point I haven't decided which lens to buy. Some lens have good reviews, but really are expensive. I don't want wait till I make up my mind. I want to buy the camera and start shooting. My primary interest is taking pictures of people and animals. I will probably use my camera indoors a lot. Would Canon EF 35mm f/2 be a good start?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Rebel XT + Canon EF 35mm f/2 as a start up?
- Thread starter grumpy2
- Start date
Chez Wimpy
Veteran Member
Not only are they a great match physically, the potential quality of your pictures will be much higher than with a zoom... and the 35mm is much more indoor friendly on the XT than the 50/1.8
This incidently, is how my XT sits (as backup camera) when I toss it in the car.
--
-CW
billybob_jcv
Senior Member
In the old days, the most commonly sold 35mm starter kits were a camera body and a 50mm f1.7/1.8/1.9/2.0 lens. Those lenses were incredibly sharp, fast, versatile and cheap. Suddenly, after the introduction of lower cost AF cameras, some Marketing sh!t-for-brains decided beginners would be better off with a very cheaply made, slow & soft wide-to-short-telezoom. A pox on the lot of 'em!
With a 1.6x FOV camera, the EF35 f2 would be a great starter kit. I am willing to bet you will get sharper, better composed shots than if you had a so-so quality kit zoom. The EF-S 18-55 kit lens is not bad - but I do think you will be amazed at what a relatively inexpensive good quality prime can do.
I applaud you for your excellent strategy!
With a 1.6x FOV camera, the EF35 f2 would be a great starter kit. I am willing to bet you will get sharper, better composed shots than if you had a so-so quality kit zoom. The EF-S 18-55 kit lens is not bad - but I do think you will be amazed at what a relatively inexpensive good quality prime can do.
I applaud you for your excellent strategy!
The answer depends on what you want to achieve.
Rebel XT + EF 35mm f/2 would be a great starter kit. 35mm f/2 will give you good coverage indoors (similar to a 56mm lens on a 35mm film camera) for taking shots of small groups of people or animals with their surroundings.
However, if you are only interested in taking pictures of people/animals one subject at a time, e.g. portraits, candid shots, etc., you may find the 50mm f/1.8 II more useful.
You can buy both the 50mm f/1.8 II and the 18-55 kit lens for less than what you have to pay for the 35mm f/2.
Rebel XT + EF 35mm f/2 would be a great starter kit. 35mm f/2 will give you good coverage indoors (similar to a 56mm lens on a 35mm film camera) for taking shots of small groups of people or animals with their surroundings.
However, if you are only interested in taking pictures of people/animals one subject at a time, e.g. portraits, candid shots, etc., you may find the 50mm f/1.8 II more useful.
You can buy both the 50mm f/1.8 II and the 18-55 kit lens for less than what you have to pay for the 35mm f/2.
D
Dave Lewis
Guest
I have a 24, 28, 35, and have had and have four 50's. I use the 50 macro some, but I use the 35 mm a lot more. I do think if I were looking for a little more all around prime to go with at the start, i would go with the 28. I do a lot of close shooting and you mention doing a lot of indoor shooting. A little more wide angle will be some help there. Remember with a longer lens like the 50, depth of field will be pretty scant, especially wide open. All of the Canon short lenses are very sharp and constrasty and are very good choices.
--
Dave Lewis
--
Dave Lewis
since you are money conscious beginner.
It will give you considerably more flexibility and you will be positioned much better for development of your style.
Or else, if the money is not an issue you could buy 10-22 EF-S + 24-70L + 70-300 DO (my current lineup, about 3000$), all great lenses.
But, I started with the kit+ 50 f/1.8 and I do not regret. Some A4 prints from the kit still hang on my walls. And, I still use the kit sometimes for indoor shots with the flash
--
Regards
alexeig
http://www.pbase.com/alexeig
It will give you considerably more flexibility and you will be positioned much better for development of your style.
Or else, if the money is not an issue you could buy 10-22 EF-S + 24-70L + 70-300 DO (my current lineup, about 3000$), all great lenses.
But, I started with the kit+ 50 f/1.8 and I do not regret. Some A4 prints from the kit still hang on my walls. And, I still use the kit sometimes for indoor shots with the flash
--
Regards
alexeig
http://www.pbase.com/alexeig
Thanks for your input.
I’m really not money conscious, even though I’m a beginner. I think if I was I would just buy a kit lens which will cost my only $70-100 CAD. The 35mm I’m considering is not very cheap. I want to start slowly with relatively inexpensive good quality equipment that will serve me for the years to come. So far I haven’t settle on anything, but 35mm sparked my interest as a general purpose camera. I also like the fact it is light. I will consider buying 50 f/1.8 as well for portraits.
You have a very nice set of lens. I read reviews on 24-70L and they’re all very good.
I’m really not money conscious, even though I’m a beginner. I think if I was I would just buy a kit lens which will cost my only $70-100 CAD. The 35mm I’m considering is not very cheap. I want to start slowly with relatively inexpensive good quality equipment that will serve me for the years to come. So far I haven’t settle on anything, but 35mm sparked my interest as a general purpose camera. I also like the fact it is light. I will consider buying 50 f/1.8 as well for portraits.
You have a very nice set of lens. I read reviews on 24-70L and they’re all very good.
I am a near beginner with the 35 f/2 and I am really happy with the choice. I happen to have the kit lens as well as the 85 f/1.8. I mostly use the 35mm and 85mm exclusively and practically never put the kit lens on the camera.
--
Nimnar -- Photo junkie
--
Nimnar -- Photo junkie
Snapman
Senior Member
--
David
David
billybob_jcv
Senior Member
Even though it is considerably more money, the EF35 f2 + EF85 f1.8 is a much more useful combo than having just the EF50 f1.8. Like many other people I bought the 50mm because it was sharp, fast & very inexpensive. It's a good lens, but I wish I had just gone for the 35mm (or the 28mm or Sigma 30mm) & then 85mm and bypassed the 50mm. I rarely use the 50mm indoors because the focal length isn't quite right. There is a reason the 50mm & 135mm were extremely popular focal lengths in full-frame film - they are really useful! The nearest equivalents of those two classic film focal lengths on the DRebel is the 28/30/35 & 85. It's only money... ;-)
SamTrychin
Member
- Messages
- 11
- Reaction score
- 0
I would seriously recommend the Sigma 30mm f/1.4. This is a fantastic prime, I've been having a great time with it, especially for indoor shots. The 50mm primes are just a bit to long for easy indoor shots.
I know there are rumors of bad lens copies, which may be true -- I thought I had a bad one, but after extensive testing, it turned out to be my camera body instead (which I subsequently managed to fix.) Some camera body focusing problems only begin to appear at super wide apertures.
I know there are rumors of bad lens copies, which may be true -- I thought I had a bad one, but after extensive testing, it turned out to be my camera body instead (which I subsequently managed to fix.) Some camera body focusing problems only begin to appear at super wide apertures.
I second that.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum