Which lens would you keep?

[James3shin]

I'm very new to photography and I'm looking for some advice on which lens to keep from some of the more experienced photographers here. I have two lenses to choose from - the Canon 50mm F1.8 or Canon 18-55mm kit lens. Like most beginners, I'm looking for something that does not exist, a wunderkind, do it all lens. I realize this so I've come to the conclusion that I'll probably shooting landscape/still life more often then fast moving targets. It's a shame because I'm an avid fisherman and want to eventually be able to shoot fly fishermen casting their lines or even better some trout jumping out of the water. The jumping trout would be bad ass! I know I'll be coughing up the dough some time down the road but for now I'll probably be taking pictures of the rivers, rapids and tree lines with some flower shots mixed in. So I ask the photographers here, with the knowledge you have which of the two would you recommend to a beginner?

 

[Fardringle]

Honestly, I would keep both of those. The 50mm is great for portraits and still life, and the 18mm end of the 18-55mm lens is much better for landscapes because of the wide angle of view.

 

[996GT2]

If you want to actually LEARN the art of photography, I think the 50mm f/1.8 is a better bet if you could only keep one of the two. Sure, it's not as versatile as the 18-55mm for landscapes, but the fixed focal length of the 50mm forces you to think about your composition more, and also teaches you that you can move your own body to zoom instead of always relying on a zoom lens. In addition, the fast aperture of the 50mm lens can produce much shallower depth of field, so it helps you learn how your choice of aperture and subject distance affect the depth of field. For night photography, there are very few lenses better than a fast, fixed focal length prime lens.

Lastly, it's smaller and lighter than even the 18-55mm kit lens, so it's quite easy to carry aound.

So...keeping it short, if you can only get one of them, I'd get the 50mm. Then, once you've gotten used to various compositional and shooting techniques, shell out $300 or so for a Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX or Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR (both of which are big improvements over the kit lens in terms of build quality, speed, and versatility).

 

[ivan2]

Originally posted by: James3shin
I'm very new to photography and I'm looking for some advice on which lens to keep from some of the more experienced photographers here. I have two lenses to choose from - the Canon 50mm F1.8 or Canon 18-55mm kit lens. Like most beginners, I'm looking for something that does not exist, a wunderkind, do it all lens. I realize this so I've come to the conclusion that I'll probably shooting landscape/still life more often then fast moving targets. It's a shame because I'm an avid fisherman and want to eventually be able to shoot fly fishermen casting their lines or even better some trout jumping out of the water. The jumping trout would be bad ass! I know I'll be coughing up the dough some time down the road but for now I'll probably be taking pictures of the rivers, rapids and tree lines with some flower shots mixed in. So I ask the photographers here, with the knowledge you have which of the two would you recommend to a beginner?

look up tamron 17-280mm. It does it all.

 

[GoSharks]

Originally posted by: 996GT2
but the fixed focal length of the 50mm forces you to think about your composition more, and also teaches you that you can move your own body to zoom instead of always relying on a zoom lens.

Fixed focal length would suck for his desired locations and subjects because he would most likely be limited in how he can move about.

I would keep the zoom.

 

[James3shin]

My only concern about the Canon 50mm F/1.8 is it's plastic construction. I'm pretty careful with electronics but sometimes I can only do so much when I'm walking/climbing down steep river banks - spill and falls do happen

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: GoSharks

Originally posted by: 996GT2
but the fixed focal length of the 50mm forces you to think about your composition more, and also teaches you that you can move your own body to zoom instead of always relying on a zoom lens.

Fixed focal length would suck for his desired locations and subjects because he would most likely be limited in how he can move about.

I would keep the zoom.

+1

 

[Deleted member 4644]

In my experience it is a MUST to have something in the 18-35 range on a crop body dSLR because otherwise you can NEVER take interior shots of more than two people. haha, seriously.

So.. I think frankly my response would be "both" or start with the 18-55.

Also, the 50mm is a bad lens for landscapes and architecture b/c it zooms too much.

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: Deleted member 4644
In my experience it is a MUST to have something in the 18-35 range on a crop body dSLR because otherwise you can NEVER take interior shots of more than two people. haha, seriously.

So.. I think frankly my response would be "both" or start with the 18-55.

Also, the 50mm is a bad lens for landscapes and architecture b/c it zooms too much.

If you're really wanting to learn about photography, you'd have a separate point and shoot for regular snapshots where you simply want to "get the shot" and aren't really worried about composition and all those other factors.

OP said that he wants to shoot pictures of fisherman/fish, along with some still life. For those things, the 50mm is an excellent lens for the task. Sure, it's not the thing to have for landscapes, but you can still pull off some great landscape shots even with a 50mm. I just think that having a prime lens to start with really makes you THINK more about your own composition while shooting, since it takes away the zoom that a beginner is so used to having with point & shoot cameras. The first camera I seriously learned on was a D70 and 50mm f/1.8 AF-D. Now, I use a Canon 50mm with my 40D.

In my opinion, some of my best shots were taken with my 50mm f/1.8 lenses. Here are some examples of shots I've taken with my Nikon/Canon 50mm f/1.8 Lenses:

Pic 1-D70, 50mm f/1.8 D, ISO 320
Pic 2-D70, 50mm f/1.8D, ISO 800
Pic 3-D200, 50mm f/1.8D (4 exposures), ISO 200
Pic 4-D200, 50mm f/1.8D, ISO 800
Pic 5-EOS 40D, EF 50mm f/1.8 II, ISO 3200

 

[Deleted member 4644]

996GT2 I see your point. I guess I am just thinking of basic usefulness, assuming his SLR is his main/only camera. Some things just can't really be shot with a 50 (aka 70mm) on a dSLR.

That said, for about $100 I don't see why he can't have both.

 

[James3shin]

I have a point and shoot camera for general use, and underwater fish shots - Pentax Optio W60. I would keep both lenses but I'm already overwhelmed with photography information not to mention all the photo processing possibilities. Right now I'm just trying stick with one lens to get comfortable with a dslr and the basics like depth of field, aperture, and exposure time. I hope to eventually get a wide angle lens like the Canon 10-22 mm for landscape shots and then something for fast action shots.

 

[Deleted member 4644]

Unless money is a huge issue, keep both. Trust me.

I started with a 50mm and an 18-55.

Lets say you go on a trip and want to take photos in a cool room or of a cool building. Might not be able to take the shot with the 50mm.

On the other hand, the 50mm teaches more about depth of field and light and fast lenses.

Keep both, even if you use one 90% of the time.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: 996GT2
If you're really wanting to learn about photography, you'd have a separate point and shoot for regular snapshots where you simply want to "get the shot" and aren't really worried about composition and all those other factors.

I don't understand what you're trying to get at here... there is no set way to "learn photography". You don't need a separate P&S. You can "worry" about snapshots as well as composition with any kind of camera.

While I agree there can be tremendous value in forcing one's self to use a single focal length in order to get a better handle on creative composition, deliberately crippling your choice of equipment seems awfully counterproductive.

OP, as LordSegan has pointed out, the best bet is to keep both lenses. Even though you say you feel overwhelmed with information, you only have to use the lens with which you are most comfortable, until in the future you decide you wish to venture out with other lenses.

There is a great fallacy that to shoot landscapes, the photographer must use a wide lens, i.e. wider than 28mm. Wide lenses, when used outdoors, are great for vistas. There are many wonderful landscape shots taken in the 28mm to 50mm focal range.

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: 996GT2
If you're really wanting to learn about photography, you'd have a separate point and shoot for regular snapshots where you simply want to "get the shot" and aren't really worried about composition and all those other factors.

I don't understand what you're trying to get at here... there is no set way to "learn photography". You don't need a separate P&S. You can "worry" about snapshots as well as composition with any kind of camera.

While I agree there can be tremendous value in forcing one's self to use a single focal length in order to get a better handle on creative composition, deliberately crippling your choice of equipment seems awfully counterproductive.

OP, as LordSegan has pointed out, the best bet is to keep both lenses. Even though you say you feel overwhelmed with information, you only have to use the lens with which you are most comfortable, until in the future you decide you wish to venture out with other lenses.

There is a great fallacy that to shoot landscapes, the photographer must use a wide lens, i.e. wider than 28mm. Wide lenses, when used outdoors, are great for vistas. There are many wonderful landscape shots taken in the 28mm to 50mm focal range.

I think you misunderstood my point. What I meant to say was that if he was FORCED to choose only one, then I recommend that he choose the 50mm to really have the benefit of a fast, fixed focal length lens for learning the ropes.

What I'm saying is that the kinds of shots LorgSegan was suggesting the 18-55mm kit lens for (group portraits indoors) can easily be handled with an P&S that the OP already has...the P&S would probably be more often used for these kinds of shots anyway since it's far easier to carry to social events. These kinds of group portraits are not really shots where a DSLR makes a huge difference, since its the content in the shots (the people) rather than the photographic aspects of the shot that are important.

OP said that he wanted to shoot fishermen and fly-fishing, with maybe a few landscapes thrown in. Now, what I got out of that was that he wanted to mostly shoot pictures of people, animals, and still life...all things that the 50mm excels at.

I posted some sample pictures of my own to show the OP what kind of shots could be taken with a 50mm lens; while it's not designed for landscapes, you can get some great landscape shots with a 50mm lens; also, OP has stated that he wanted to get a 12-24 or 10-22mm down the road...so not having an 18-55mm really isn't that big of a deal to me.

Last thing...the 50mm f/1.8 is a lens that you will probably keep for a very long time, even after you get some more expensive lenses. The 18-55, on the other hand, isn't really useful at all once you get a faster 18-50 f/2.8 or 17-85 IS to replace it. So, if you get the 50mm now and stick with it for a few months, you can always get a better second lens to go along with it.

Basically, long story short:
-If forced to choose only 1, I'd get 50mm
-50mm is an excellent lens for many situations, including some landscapes
-50mm is a "keeper" lens, 18-55 is not
-Getting both is better and more versatile, but the OP was asking for a choice of ONE of the two.

 

[soydios]

both. 50/1.8 for serious photography, 18-55 for snapshots. even if you buy a lens that directly overlaps the 18-55 (like an 18-200), keep the 18-55 as a lightweight snapshot lens.

 

[GoSharks]

The 50mm is not ideal for his situation. I maintain that he will be able to get more quality shots of fishermen and fly-fishing with the zoom lens rather than the prime. Simple reason being that it could be quite possible that he will be physically unable to frame a shot to his liking because of access issues. When you're in nature, sometimes things just get in the way - such as trees, cliffs, rocks, water/ice, etc.

 

[Deadtrees]

In OP's case, 50mm won't work. Canon 18-55mm should be the choice out of those two.

However, how about Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or whatever brand 18-xxx mm?

 

[ghostman]

I have both lenses. The Canon 50mm F/1.8 was my first lens and I'm not a huge fan of it. One of the nice things about wide apertures is the ability to use the lens in low light conditions. But the Canon 50mm F/1.8 is useless in low light with autofocus as it seeks endlessly. I got a Tamron F/2.8 28-75mm, which is an excellent lens. Since the range is covered and the Tamron aperture is still rather large, I never use the 50mm F/1.8 anymore. I did end up buying the kit lens (used) to fill the wide angle aspect until I invest in a super-wide angle lens.

For the OP, it sounds like a wider angle would be more useful for the type of photos you're looking for.

 

[joutlaw]

I have a Rebel XSi and have both lenses and you can't really compare the 50mm 1.8 and the EF-S 18-55mm at 50mm. The prime is just a wonderful lens. The 18-55mm really is good for a kit lens at 18mm. I also bought the EF-S 55-250mm and I feel I have a pretty good mix of lens.

What lens would I rather shoot with... the 50mm gives me personally a pro feel to my pictures. They turn out very warm and rich.

 

[alexruiz]

Keep the prime.

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: James3shinwhich of the two would you recommend to a beginner?

A super wide is a practical must-have lens for a crop DSLR, and these tend to be expensive and/or bad, and in this view the 18-55 IS has a very important role, so it or a direct replacement is needed. If/when you get a 10-22 or something else, you can afford to not have this lens. Until then, what's the alternative?

The 50 f/1.8 is a great inexpensive lens which is useful for portraiture, WYSIWYG photography, shallow DoF, and provides a reference for optics, all of which are useful for advancing beginners. It is also inexpensive and highly portable, so there isn't a really good reason giving up this lens until you have a direct replacement, which the 18-55 isn't entirely.

 

[Nizology]

I am not sure if you mentioned which dslr body you had, but most likely it's it doesn't have a full frame sensor. Therefore, keep in my mind when choosing your lens the multiplication factor...usually about 1.6x. Thus, a 50mm lens would actually be an 80mm.

fyi

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: James3shin
My only concern about the Canon 50mm F/1.8 is it's plastic construction. I'm pretty careful with electronics but sometimes I can only do so much when I'm walking/climbing down steep river banks - spill and falls do happen

But you can get a used 50mm f/1.8 for around $60. Keep it and bring some bubble wrap with you if you are that worried. The 50mm is such a fun lens... for the price every canon owner should have one.