Reading mode: Light Dark

Steadman's Tips: First Lens for New SLR Owner

Go to last post
...is not a good way to illustrate a point about beginner. You, a professional (and experienced, I must add, since "professional" is not enough to characterize a photographer) photographer took these photos in VERY dim conditions, with no flash allowed, in a special situation. Beginners don't do that that often. Beginners learn first to take easy, common shots - landscapes, still life, flowers, animals in zoo, portraits, kids, people in various situations. Just shooting around a learnig how to focus, expose, compose, use DOF and perspective, adjusting photos in PS and printing them. Not everyone takes photos on concerts.

Here is a lousy photo from the beginner, me. I couldn't have taken this photo if I haven't quickly zoomed from 28mm to 95mm. I couldn't zoom with my feet with 50/1.4 that fast, I'm no Johnson.

28.0-135.0mm @ 95.0mm
Subject dist: 7.1m
1/350 sec, f/5.6



Using zoom, I was able to capture what seemed to me a beautiful moment. I was able to quickly isolate the subject by filling the frame with it. With 50/1.4, the swan would have been twice smaller, surrounded by other unwanted subjects. And if I wanted to crop to achieve the same composition, I would essentially get only 1.5MP image instead of 6MP. So, I learned a lesson in composition without zooming with my feet, and also noticed how limited DOF blurs the background.

With 50/1.4, I couldn't have taken this shot:

28.0-135.0mm @ 127.0mm
Subject dist: 2.75m
1/180 sec, f/5.6


  • with 50/1.4, not only I couldn't reach shorter subject distance quickly to not miss the shot (with the same composition), but I could have bitten by this dangerous bird if I dared to do so ;)) For the beginner, DOF blur is good enough on this photo.
Again, by NOT LIMITING myself, I not only LEARNED something, but also have taken photos which I like, instead of missing them. f/1.4 would have given me soft pictures (because 50/1.4 is soft at 1.4) and the composition which I would have been FORCED to, not choose. Besides, image stabilization at 127mm (effectively 203mm on D60) saved me from handshake blur at 1/180s.

So, as a beginner, I find that I learn a lot by NOT LIMITING myself, but rather by giving me easy tools to begin with small steps to better pictures. It's only when I grow enough I can handle more difficult situations like taking pictures of live concert with 50/1.4 without flash.
 
Hello David,

The shot taken with the 85mm is one of the best I have seen you produce (at least from the ones I have seen on this forum). The complex multi-colors and the light and the expression and the composition are very nice.

Just wanted to encourage you to keep shooting them like this.

Well done.

Steadman
 
Had fun today shooting the Chiefs game. There WERE a couple of moments where I had a good small prime lens, but I would have missed most of the action without a 100-400L!

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1152193&size=lg

Regards,
Steve
Steadman Uhlich said:
This is addressed to a new owner of their first SLR camera.

As photography as a hobby is easy to enter, and many folks enter
the new Digital SLR user base by coming from a 'point and
shoot' experience, so many people first struggle with some new
issues that are often driven by lack of 'experience' with the
"new" 'options' like Depth of Field and variable aperture.

Put another way...when you used a sophisticated Point and Shoot
camera, it is likely that you used it on full auto with a zoom lens
that responds to the touch of a button (wide/tele) and a built-in
flash (on for almost all shots). When a new DSLR owner comes
from this experience, their first inclination may be to purchase
a budget super zoom lens that covers a very wide focal length
range...despite its other shortcomings. This "experience" is
common.

When you purchase your first Digital SLR...you are faced with
many choices...one of the most pressing is which lens to
purchase as your first.

My suggestion below is based on a desire to help you learn
something about your camera (somethings you may not already know)
and to learn to 'see' beyond the lens.

Put very simply and bluntly...it is often very good to learn with a
more 'simple' beginning lens that will allow you to learn some of
the important things without adding additional variables (variable
max aperture, variable focal length) that are often found as
features of a zoom lens.

I suggest that you first puchase a Canon 50mm f1.4 lens.

Here is why:

1. Buying the 50mm f1.4 will open up your eyes to the wonder of low
light photography. Photos taken without a flash. Natural looking
photos. Photos taken in lower light that makes some shots
impossible with other lenses. I believe this can be the most "eye
opening" experience for someone (the average snap shooter) coming
from a Point and Shoot experience. What you will see through your
fast f1.4 lens is lots of light. Scenes will look 'natural' and
not 'dark' in the viewfinder (unless the scene is dark...wink).
With good technique (hand holding steadily, using a tripod, or
adjusting ISO speed) you will be surprised at the pics you can make
without any flash...even in dimly lit rooms or scenes. If you
don't have experience with low light 'fast lens' photography,
you are in for a real treat.

Put another way...if your total experience with cameras so far has
been with slower zoom lenses (max aperture f4.5 etc..), and then
you put a f1.4 lens on the camera body...you will be so
surprised at the amount of light you will now see...you will
probably go "WOW" (Literally!) Seeing is believing in this case.
If you don't know much about aperture now...don't worry. Put very
simply, a fast f1.4 lens has the potential to let in about 8 times
(!) as much light as a slower zoom lens...(this is just an
example...it could be more!).

Aside: If someone who has experienced this "WOW" feeling when
looking through their first fast lens will kindly post a reply
below attesting to this I would appreciate your contribution to
this thread topic. Just put "WOW" in your subject line of your
reply.

2. The learning experience of learning how DOF (Depth of Field)
works on the images. Learning aperture and DOF issues is a very
important part of mastering photography. Having the more 'expanded'
range of possible apertures (down to f1.4 for instance) will allow
you to experiment, learn and quickly see the differences. This
knowledge will help you more than any lens in the future as you
assess shots and potential shots. With the ability to "open up"
the aperture you will find that you are capable of 'blurring the
background' and other such techniques that make some pics really
stand out. You may see 'portraits' in a wholely different way.

3. The 50 f1.4 is relatively small and light compared to most zoom
lenses an far sharper (some may say 'better') than most zoom
lenses. It is easier to handle than most fast zoom lenses too.
More likely to 'walk around' with you. And, some people prefer its
small size as it does not 'intimidate' some people as much as
some of the larger/longer lenses. This may be more important to
you than you even realize, especially if you are photographing
children.

4. The optical quality of the Canon 50mm f1.4 is of the highest
ranking. It is very 'sharp' and considered one of their best
lenses for optical quality and considered outstanding when
compared to competitive lenses at that price point or focal
length. This 'quality' may not seem like a big deal to you if you
are just starting out. Let me just assure you that this lens, even
if purchased as a 'starter' or 'first' lens, is one you will be
able to use and keep with no fear of having purchased a poor
quality lens. The average Canon 50mm f1.4 is so good that it
will give you a good starting point to judge additional purchases
of lenses too.

The 50mm is a great place to start.

A few more points are covered in my 'reply' to my own thread as
this has gotten too long for a single post. Just read the reply
below this to continue.

(Continued)
Click to expand...
 
Yes, I understand that many photos cannot be taken with a 50/1.4 (which is why I own so many lenses - LOL).

I still think that if one's goal is to learn "photography", he should have some sort of low-light lens in his arsenal fairly soon. It's not a lens solely for "experienced photographers". (No lens is, really, if that lens is needed to really learn a particular aspect of photography).

My recommendation for a beginner is still the 28-135 IS and a 50/1.4 (or 50/1.8). Unless he's got specific telephoto or wide-angle goals in mind, he should be well-covered with those two lenses (as learning tools, and as well as a nice, light camera kit) for quite some time.

If he's a well-heeled beginner, and wants even more flexibility, he could substitute the 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 IS (or 70-200/4) for the 28-135 IS lens.

I think Steadman was trying to make a point, though, to those who might come here and think that they can't take decent pictures or learn without a bewildering array of equipment.

If somebody had about $1300 to spend, and wants to learn photography, I'd tell them to get a used D30, 50/1.8, some CF cards, and a used aluminum tripod.

Then I'd tell him to NEVER read this forum again, unless he wants to spend more money. ;)

--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
 
If they'd keep throwing me lighting like that, and I could end up sitting in the right spot, I'd have a lot more of these. ;)
Steadman Uhlich said:
The shot taken with the 85mm is one of the best I have seen you
produce (at least from the ones I have seen on this forum). The
complex multi-colors and the light and the expression and the
composition are very nice.

Just wanted to encourage you to keep shooting them like this.

Well done.
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
 
IMHO limiting yourself is not good way to learn something. It's not putting someone behind bars, but FREEDOM can show him the beauty of the world and teach a lot.

When you're learning basics, you need EASY tools, which can make you feel comfortable in this field. THEN, when you're standing on your feet steady enough, you will get into more demanding situations and that is when you need to learn more advanced tools. Limiting to a prime or shooting in low light with low ISO is not a beginner's realm. It's when he learns enough with zoom and forgiving IS, he can advance to shooting with prime to achieve maximum sharpness or capture dim light.
Steadman Uhlich said:
However,I think the greatest obstacles to learning (photography)
are (not in any particular order or ranking):

1. lack of an open mind (preconceived notions, lack of originality)
Click to expand...
Limiting to fixed focal length is a lack of an open mind. As well as your advice about not taking pictures of people with trees - a preconceived notion. Good pictures CAN be taken with zooms and trees.
Steadman Uhlich said:
2. lack of experience with and understanding how aperture
affects DOF and light capture
Click to expand...
No need to go to extreems of f/1.4 for that. This is f/8 with 24-70@70mm:



Looks good to me to learn DOF.
Steadman Uhlich said:
3. dependence on "slow" zooms (hard to explain succinctly here)
Click to expand...
That's what I suggested - consider lenses as long-term investments and buy fast zooms. But f/3.5-5.6 zoom is not terribly slow for a beginner, if he is on a budget. f/5.6 or higher will be most useful F-number anyway for most shots due to DOF and sharpness.
Steadman Uhlich said:
4. Use of slow lenses that necessitate slow shutter speeds
(making the shot prone to shake blur)
Click to expand...
IS nicely takes care of that and saves 2 stops. Very handy for a beginner. It's like 3-wheel bicycle for learning to ride... ;) IS lenses should be marketed as "amateur" lenses. No IS for tough professionals. Like Jaja from Belgium who can handhold 500mm IN BULB MODE (LOL)
Steadman Uhlich said:
5. Dependence upon on-camera flash lighting (creates a single
'look')
Click to expand...
That's what will urge him to buy external flash and learn flash photography. I hope you understand the importance of learning flash photography and the E-TTL puzzle. $170 (420EX) is less than 10% addition to camera cost.
Steadman Uhlich said:
6. Blaming the equipment rather than looking at the photographer's
skills and techniques.
Click to expand...
That's what the beginner will do with 50/1.4. "If it were 135mm, I could have filled the frame with subject, as I wanted... And that photo I took in dim light at f/1.4, it shows only the tip of the nose in focus! I better use the flash or tripod!"

You can't reverse the time... THAT smile, THOSE eyes... they're GONE.
Steadman Uhlich said:
7. Expecting the camera to "do it all" for the image to be good.
Click to expand...
Camera/lenses should not create obstacles ARTIFICIALLY. It will not result in great photos.
Steadman Uhlich said:
8. Lack of understanding how different Focal Lengths affects the
'look' of an image.
Click to expand...
That's what prime limits the beginner to.
 
DavidP said:
My recommendation for a beginner is still the 28-135 IS and a
50/1.4 (or 50/1.8).
Click to expand...
I agree. Looks like I followed your recommendation before reading it. But I bet, 50/1.4 will be used less than 10% of the time, and much more will be learned from shooting with 28-135.

For now, I use 50/1.4 for running (D60 w/o grip + compact lens to minimize weight), for low light landscapes and for testing other lenses (such as my soft 24-70L) as a champion in sharpness. BTW, I was surprised how it is soft at 1.4... muddy! But already at f/2 it shines. Now, THAT taught me a lot ;))) I'm an expert in "L"emons now LOL
DavidP #28649 said:
I think Steadman was trying to make a point, though, to those who
might come here and think that they can't take decent pictures or
learn without a bewildering array of equipment.
Click to expand...
28-135 is THE single most versitile lens which is only $100 more expensive than 1.4. What any photographer should understand that lens is the most important part of the system, and thus MORE money should be put in purchasing lenses than on body etc. $400 lens is only less than 20% of D60 (and only 5% of 1Ds LOL). Consider it like VAT in Britains ;)
DavidP #28649 said:
Then I'd tell him to NEVER read this forum again, unless he wants
to spend more money. ;)
Click to expand...
Money can be earned back, but TIME can not. I find myself spending too much time in the forum and less shooting. But this is just a transient phase... I learned A LOT.
 
How would you zoom with your feet with 50/1.4 to get this?

70-200@165mm f5.6 1/125s handheld



Are these feet which you're suggesting to zoom with?



Pretty shallow DOF, huh?

I could zoom with my feet here, but this dog would think I want his owner's boots, and throw me from the cliff:

200mm



I also got away with this without being bitten, and got a nice b/g blur without f/1.4:



I didn't want my feet wet, so I zoomed with the lens, not feet:

145mm



How would you capture this angle and perspective with 50mm?

20mm



Perhaps, I should own a horse to zoom faster - with horse's feet:



I could zoom with my feet in this candid shot, but then I'll get a funny look instead of tranquility:

200mm



I'm no Superman to zoom with my feet in this situation:



You know why this squirrel looks so angry? Because I tried to zoom in with my feet:



(and he is so fat because he just ate a photographer with 50/1.4)

I needed to sit still and zoom with the zoom ring, not my feet:



(he is finishing that poor photographer's ear)

And finally: these are MY FEET, and I couldn't zoom with them to take this shot:



That's how I learn photography. By not limiting myself with anything.
 
Mishkin said:
So, as a beginner, I find that I learn a lot by NOT LIMITING
myself, but rather by giving me easy tools to begin with small
steps to better pictures. It's only when I grow enough I can handle
more difficult situations like taking pictures of live concert with
50/1.4 without flash.
Click to expand...
hmmm, do we really have to take concert photos? darn....what if we don't even like concerts?

There are also professionals that shoot nature, street photography, architecture etc....

But before that, as an amateur (might not even want to become a professional, just take the best possible photos) it's still about a great hobby, and also doing the best you can, doing it well. Might be concert stuff, might be birds or people. I don't that what you shoot is specifically what makes you a professional and that the others don;'t care about how their photos come out.

It's also about having the right tool for the job. Running after birds with a 50mm might be a way to start but not a goal to work towards. There is no need to work towards handling more difficult situations with a 50mm when it is clearly not the right tool for the job. That either makes you a photographer who's very strapped for cash or a not very bright one (generally speaking of course) :)

My 50mm has been a good tool to start learning how to handle that DSLR and working more on the basics of photography like placement and composition but after a while became a hindrance, as not having the right tool is not a good way to progress.

Well, I guess I agree with you mostly :)

And as far as flash photography goes, I just forgot about it completely as it has rarely, very rarely given me any good result. I'll probably try again the day that I can put money into decent flash hardware (coming back to having the right tools). In the meantime, I have learned to recognize the situations that will lead to good photos (when the light is right, or searching for the right light) and the ones where pressing the shutter will be a waste of time.

David.

--
Canon D30
My photo gallery: http://www.pbase.com/davidp
 
I chose this len over the 28 - 135 IS. My thought was that a faster lens was better than a slower lens with IS as I will often be capturing moving subjects. Because of the 1.6 adjustment I was afraid the 50 would be a little long for indoors. With a 35 mm equilivent of 44 - 100 approx. I'm hoping the Sigma will be a good first lens. Both the camera and the lens are on the way.

Next I have to get a flash. Will it be the 550EX or perhaps the Sunpack or Sigma which are both much cheaper hmmm...

My next lens purchase may be the Sigma 70 -200 2.8 and a 2X. Seems to be a popular combo. The other possibility would be the 100 - 400L. I'll wait until I have some experience with the camera before I make any more purchases.
 
Hello,

I think you may have missed my point. No sense in debating it here. You just see it differently.

As I see it, almost all of the shots you posted could have been taken with the 50mm f1.4 if desired or if the photographer did not feel limited in some way (experience, convenience, skill, etc...).

Looking at everything you posted, the only shot I saw that has a different look to it is the shot of the sea shore. That kind of shot usually looks good in a 'wide' angle perspective, but it is also not necessary either.

I don't write this to antagonize you, just to assure you that with a single lens such as the 50mm you can create images that look just like yours.

Your decision to use your zoom is your decision...and the 28-135mmIS is one of my favorite lenses.

Thanks for sharing your pics with us.

Steadman
 
David Pichevin said:
Mishkin said:
How would you zoom with your feet with 50/1.4 to get this?

70-200@165mm f5.6 1/125s handheld
Click to expand...
Handheld? you mean you didn't try to setup a tripod while hanging
from the cliff?? I don't believe you. Everybody knows ya can't get
a good photo without a tripod :)
Click to expand...
She was approaching the top of the cliff, where I was standing. With 50/1.4, I would need to have been hanging on the ropes...
 
The next time I'm shooting concerts, I'm gonna hop up on stage, and rush to the performer's side, and say "but, but, but . . . Steadman said I could do this, as long as I don't feel limited". ;)



That one actually WAS taken on-stage, though with the 70-200/2.8 IS. There's a point at which leaving some "personal space" DOES prevent things like broken noses, I bet. ;)
Steadman Uhlich said:
As I see it, almost all of the shots you posted could have been
taken with the 50mm f1.4 if desired or if the photographer did
not feel limited in some way (experience, convenience, skill,
etc...).
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
 
Well, you missed mine, that's for sure. My point is that restriction is not a good thing IMO, freedom is. If you want restriction, why wouldn't you restrict yourself beyond fixing the focal length, by not using other variables such as aperture, shutter speed, variable ISO? I guess, that will make even more creative?

It's like forcing yourself to live in 2-dimensional world. I understand your point about perspective, but you can choose focal length on a zoom AND adjust the perspective. I gives you more variables, more degrees of freedom.

In this shot, I changed the PERSPECTIVE with my feet (to make the swan appear bigger than it is compared to man), and then FRAMED the shot using zoom:



With fixed lens, you can't BOTH change the perspective AND frame the shot. I hope you understand what I mean.
Steadman Uhlich said:
Hello,

I think you may have missed my point. No sense in debating it
here. You just see it differently.

As I see it, almost all of the shots you posted could have been
taken with the 50mm f1.4 if desired or if the photographer did
not feel limited in some way (experience, convenience, skill,
etc...).

Looking at everything you posted, the only shot I saw that has a
different look to it is the shot of the sea shore. That kind of
shot usually looks good in a 'wide' angle perspective, but it is
also not necessary either.

I don't write this to antagonize you, just to assure you that
with a single lens such as the 50mm you can create images that
look just like yours.

Your decision to use your zoom is your decision...and the
28-135mmIS is one of my favorite lenses.

Thanks for sharing your pics with us.

Steadman
Click to expand...
 
DavidP said:


That one actually WAS taken on-stage, though with the 70-200/2.8
IS. There's a point at which leaving some "personal space" DOES
prevent things like broken noses, I bet. ;)
Steadman Uhlich said:
As I see it, almost all of the shots you posted could have been
taken with the 50mm f1.4 if desired or if the photographer did
not feel limited in some way (experience, convenience, skill,
etc...).
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
Click to expand...
 
Steadman Uhlich said:
Looking at everything you posted, the only shot I saw that has a
different look to it is the shot of the sea shore. That kind of
shot usually looks good in a 'wide' angle perspective, but it is
also not necessary either.
I don't write this to antagonize you, just to assure you that
with a single lens such as the 50mm you can create images that
look just like yours.
Click to expand...
Since the camera in this shot with 20mm lens was at eye level (6ft), to get EXACTLY this shot with 50mm lens, the camera should have been at 15ft (6*50/20) above the ground. So you're telling me I should carry a ladder to get this shot? (I wanted both green weed puddle clearly visible AND water burst in this shot, so don't tell me I should've just moved 2.5 times farther horizontally). But carrying the ladder contradicts with your philosophy of self-restriction. How would you then take this shot? Throwing the camera up and releasing the shutter with remote? LOL
Mishkin said:
How would you capture this angle and perspective with 50mm?

20mm

Click to expand...
 
Mishkin said:
Since the camera in this shot with 20mm lens was at eye level
(6ft), to get EXACTLY this shot with 50mm lens, the camera should
have been at 15ft (6*50/20) above the ground.
Click to expand...
Correction: even then the shot wouldn't be EXACTLY the same: the boat on horizon and other distant features will look differently or even disappear from the picture. To get EXACTLY the same picture, the camera must be EXACTLY at the same POINT and with the same FIELD OF VIEW (that is, the same focal length).
Mishkin said:
Mishkin said:
How would you capture this angle and perspective with 50mm?

20mm

Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top