Please don't flame me!

[Big John]

Hi everyone, I am a VERY junior member to the forum, and have learned so much from all of you already! Thank you for that!

I am new to SLR (D-Rebel) photography and have just the kit lens, as well as a canon 75-300 mm F4 - 6.5 USM lens (which I am very satisfied with quality wise) but what I am seeing is what appears to be an attitude of "If it's not an L-lens, it's not worth your time."

I can certainly understand that perspective from a professional standpoint regarding optical quality, but I personally find it very frustrating that there is little consideration for newbies like myself who can't justify spending more than a couple of hundred bucks per lens. I fully understand that you ultimately get what you pay for, but there seems to be more concern with the type of lens is being used rather than the result it achieves.

I have seen another thread that talks about how frustrating it is to hear comments like "No wonder your pictures are so good, with that type of camera I could shoot like that too" As someone said on the link "It's the magician, not the wand" and this is what I am trying to improve on. My medium is what it is (very tight budget), but I want to improve my knowledge and skill levels.

Please understand I have the utmost respect for your experience and collective wisdom, it's just frustrating to never be able to find lens recommendation for enthusiusts on a budget like myself. I am sure you have all been there at the beginnings of your careers and what I am hoping to fing is a link or a website that would give ratings for lenses not based on what professional photography would require, but rather what would produce some outstanding photos for the beginner.

Can anyone help me?

[dsze]

Yes, many of us love the "L's" -but, this is by far one of the friendliest forums I've ever experienced. I honestly don't know of any people here that would shun you because of equipment. Some people get a little too caught up in having the latest & greatest, but thats to be expected. We love these toys. I think I speak for many of the members here when I acknowledge that it truly is the photographer and not the gear. The gear helps, but a 1DsMkII with all the L's in the world to choose from in the hands of a total noob isn't going to produce the images that a G-series would in the hands of someone with experience. Feel free to ask questions here. Many people will be more than happy to help you improve you skills.

-daniel

[etaf]

i have the 75-300mm, the 28-105mm and i'm very pleased with the results - but i guess when reading posts I expect to see remarks about L glass, however, i'm sure if I/you put a thread here with a budget $$$ specfied for a lens then I/you would get some very good advice.
I have seen reviews in lots of magazines where they compare lenses in a given price range and mark best value for money.

It does not really matter what the kit is - its how its used, I have seen some really poor pictures taken with top quality gear and some great pictures on cheap compacts.

[Big John]

Thanks Daniel, don't get me wrong, I am a total gearhead when it comes to electronics and cameras, but for some unfathomable reason, my wife does'nt see it the same way as me! The lack of budget for new lenses has less to do with lack of income, but more of a lack of enthusiasm from my wife who would rather spend a $1000.00 on a new washing machine than a new bit of glass for my hobby!

[primoz]

I think bunch of people will dissagree with this what I will say but I will still say it :) For me personally it feels like waste of money and nerves (convincing your wife you definitely need $5000 worth lens costs you bunch of nerves :) ) buying few $1000 worth lenses if you are going to use camera for taking occasional photos from your trips or holidays. Most of lenses are not that bad, that most of people would even see difference. Ok there is one thing in this. If you look photo zoomed to 1600% in PS then you will definitely see every single artifact some lens have. Same thing will happen if you will blow that photo to 2x1.5m and you will look it from close. But personally I think there's not many people who would do something like this. Most of people make 10x15cm photos or watch photos on tv (tv has resolution of about 720x560... I forgot actual resolution of PAL since it's ages since I was doing stuff for tv for last time). With so small photos you won't see difference between 70-200 and 70-300 lens.
Ok there's always another thing... you are shooting every day, you are shooting in bad conditions (dust, water, bad weather etc.), you need faster lens etc. I agree with that you don't have any other chance then pro equipment. But once when you are shooting like that you most probably earn money with shooting, so that lens turns all of a sudden from object of your dreams to your work tool. And work tools costs.
And just to finish... if you know what you are doing you can take better photos with some 70-300/4-5.6 lens and eos 300d then someone who doesn't have eye but has 1d and 300/2.8 (akhm... any relations to my avatar are pure coincidence :) ). In most of conditions where normal people are shooting your eye plays biggest role not your equipment.

[BlueTit]

I agree, this forum is extremely helpful and all the members that I have come across are friendly and happy to help. Sure the "L" lens get a lot of coverage for several reasons, its a photography forum with some serious photographers, professional and amatuer and the L's are very serious lenses. But the over riding theme is the love of photography and whether the photo is taken wth an L lens, normal lens or a P&S does not matter to most people.

I have seen many posts where someone asks for advice about lens choice and where they have suggested a budget, more often than not the reponses will stick to the budget and make good suggestions for alternatives.

You quoted someone saying ""No wonder your pictures are so good, with that type of camera I could shoot like that too"" I don't know who said it, but more often than not they'd be wrong. The equipment is only have the battle, experience, skill and the ability to spot a shot are all very important factors too, as dsze said a newbie with the best gear won't come near an experienced photographer with the basic equipment. Unfortunately I know this only too well as most some of my "best" shots were just luck.

Enjoy the forum.

[schmoelzel]

Welcome to the forum........if you search, you'll find a lot of recommendations for non-L glass and stunning examples. I'll give you three that are bargains and take 'as good as L' shots in the right hands:

1)EF 50f1.4 - $260 USD (this is what I paid)
2)EF 85f1.8 - $245 USD (this is what I paid)
3)Carl Zeiss Jena 135/3.5 Sonnar - $170 USD

All three of these lenses are great! And they don't break the bank. I must admit I have 'L fever'; once you try one you just know the quality that is involved and it is very hard to use consumer grade glass.......that said, the 3 lenses I just mentioned remain part of my photo bag and I use them A LOT. Most important is not to have the equipment but to use it............who cares if the shots are not great or your neighbour doesn't WOW with delight........if it's a hobby, just taking the time to go out and take pictures is relaxing and a great way to spend leisure time.

Now go out and take pictures instead of reading these forums!! (maybe I should tell myself that!!)

[Big John]

I couldn't agree with you more!

I started off with a point and shoot 3.2 megapixel and found that the pictures of my children were delightful (I freely admit bias). I found myself carrying it with me whenever and wherever I went, happily taking pictures of the world around me. Very quickly I found myself looking to take more artistic shots rather than snapshots. In less than a year I felt i had outgrown my 3.2 megapixel point and shoot. I bought a 5 megapixel camera with a 10x zoom and the creativity seemed to really boom. I was an Art minor in college and felt like I had found a new and exciting creative outlet wich was enriching my personal life.

In less than a year again, I bought the D-Rebel looking to explore the world of interchangeable lenses and learn more creative control of my photographs. I have not been disappointed by the experience, but as a I look back at some of my earlier photo's, I realized that these were every bit as good as some of my photo's taken with the D-Rebel!

It had little to do with the equipment and much more to do with the enthusiasm and energy I put into them!

[sf_1857]

A few months back I started researching DSLRs as I wanted to move from film to dig taking sports pics. The people on this forum have been a TREMENDOUS help.
My next research was lenses. Also, my budget for first lens is around $200.
This thread:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=71885&highlight=SIGMA+70-300
and links in this thread were of great help in comapring Sigma 100-300, Sigma 70-300 APO, Canon 75-300, etc.
I'm looking at buying the Sigma 70-300 APO Super II at www.sigma4less.com at around $175.
I've learned so much about lenses in a few weeks bc of this forum.
Keep reading and researching. This is a great resource and the people are knowledgable and friendly.

[dannym]

I love my 1 L lens, but, I've been most impressed with shots from the standard "kit" lens' that come with the Rebel. I've seen some amazine shots. Most of my shots in the past were taken with a K1000 and ME Super with the standard f2.0 lens and with a "no name" 70-200 zoom. I have a lot of good shots with them. Just get what you can afford and don't worry about what others brag about.
Have fun!

[lkorell]

My first entry into digital was with the Digital Rebel. My first non-kit lens was the 50 1.8II for about $70. No biggie. Then I expanded with the 85 1.8, which was extremely affordable for such a high quality tool.

You can get some great lenses without spending your life savings. The references to L glass on this forum is really because it's a Canon forum and L glass is the "professional" line that Canon puts out there. It's our obligation as Canon users to discuss these lenses, not to mention drool over them. ;)

Now, after saying that, I do own four L lenses and 20D cameras. But, it took me eight months to acquire them and lots of research to make sure it was money well spent.

As someone new to SLR photography, your task will be to soak up all of the info you can and decide what works for you. I don't think anyone on this forum will ever criticize you for not buying L lenses. We all have budgets and we all have need for specific equipment for different applications.

There's lots of good camera gear out there in all ranges of production. If this was a Nikon forum, you'd probably hear lots of talk about AF-S lenses and things like that. Don't let it get to you - you've already made a good choice in the direction you are headed. The digital Rebel rocks! It could be the perfect entry level DSLR, and it has much appeal even to the professional shooter. There are many using it for portraiture with great success.

All the best,

Lou

[Dante King]

Welcome Big John!

Photography is dependant on the camera and lenses used. However I feel the skill of the photographer, IMHO, is more important and relevant over if you have L glass. See I am the MASTER OF THE OBVIOUS!

[Andy_T]

Big John,

First of all ... welcome to the forum :D

First of all let me say that I would really feel sorry if I saw the actual words "If it's not an L-lens, it's not worth your time." posted by someone on the forum :sad: What I expect is something along the lines of 'Well, you can use this lens, but you will get more keepers with that lens" or an outright 'Better stay off that lens. It's poop."

But the second statement has (to my knowledge) never been said about the 75-300 lens, only about lenses (e.g. Quantaray/Phoenix) where it was a very helpful remark because it was true and it was mentioned drastically enough to keep the guy asking from buying that lens.

Also ... believe me that nobody will ever say 'This is a bad picture, because it was taken with the XXX lens", rather "This is a bad picture, because it is all blurred. Try using higher ISO or a faster lens next time".

If your pictures are good, people will tell you.
If your pictures suck, people will (by and large) be too tactful to say it loud and rather say nothing or something flattering like 'Great idea...':lol:

And don't confuse disregard for lens A or B with disregard for you as a person because you choose only to spend so much money on your lenses. Just take the pictures to prove that you are a good photographer.

And welcome to the forum :wink:

Best regards,
Andy

[steibeldj]

Welcome aboard Big John. I like to think of it as more what kinds of shots the more expensive lenses allow rather than good or bad shots. It is really all about the photographer.

You want low light, the ability to zoom close and no blur? Well that will cost you plenty. But in good light with the kit lens, a good photographer can set the camera, compose the shot and using their best technique get a beauty most of the time.

I started off with the Rebel 2000 and the crappy $69 28-80 lens. I still love some of those shots I took then. Then again, I missed a few that the lens and camera just couldn't handle.

Look, just have fun. Time marches forward and those shots of yourself in the mirror 10 years ago make you smile!

[ed2day]

John,

I like the analogy to the magician/wand. I'm a prime example of a magician with a set of "L" wands that has trouble finding that rabbit in the hat.

I think the "L" mystique is a little overdone. Actually I'm amazed these days how good optically the cheaper lens are. Many of the areas where they fall short aren't even a factor in the vast majority of photos (wide open/corner shapness).

I don't see a lot of snobbery on this forum. But you have to remember, until recently the DSLR barrier to entry was over $1000 so most participants on this forum could afford to stretch for an L lens or two. So there's not as much talk about $200-300 lenses and that's a shame but as you've seen there's people that have put together great collections of lenses in that price range.

[Big John]

Thank you all again for your input on this. I apologize if I came across as being less than respectful to anyone or if my statements were a little exagerated

I am so blown away by the talent level and the knowledge base of the forum that sometimes I feel very intimidated asking some basic questions. I can honestly say that after your responses to my posting, you have all shown me a great deal of respect and helped me immensely!

[ron chappel]

Your right though big john,this forum does tend to be (mostly) about L lenses

It bugs me too but only slightly because it's a very friendly place otherwise.

That 75-300 you have is a good budget lens.I (and many others) have some very good images from it.

(allthough i must admit that i have no really good ones taken near 300mm,it's very weak at that end)

[Gerdav43]

Big John, WELCOME! I once had the same feeling as you several years ago when I first joined. Maybe it was an inferiority complex I had, or maybe just a small wallet. However, I posted a similar comment and I got smoked. Maybe, I deserved it. I used a little more sandpaper in my commentary. So I went away for a while and continued to pursue my hobby. Now I'm not saying you should go away. I came back and found a much more diverse forum from when I first started. The information was always fantastic and now with the new setup there are more places to go and more classifications to post and search. The amount of information here can be overwhelming at first. But as I did, you will learn and be more comfortable working with what you have and you will slowly but steadily graduate into a comfort zone not only with your equipment but with your knowledge of the art/hobby.

I'd like to take this time to thank all the members that are a part of the forum for their postings and sharing their skills with us. I enjoy reading here everyday. A special thanks to PEKKA (and all the moderators). The new improved forum is tremendous!!:D

[mdaddyrabbit]

Sir I have had the 70-200mm f/4 L now for 2 weeks and alot of my stuff looks like crap but its not the lens or the camera, its me. Photography is a combo of 60% artistic photographer and 40% luck. Its a talent as is painting, drawing, or anything else that appeals to the the eye of the beholder. You dont have to have the L lens or the latest greatest camera just a will to snap photos and a burning desire to get better and better. Take what you have (talent & equipment) and use it to the fullest, it is really enjoyable and relaxing. Take this to heart, live life as if its your last day and always enjoy the precious things that make you happy and forget about the L lens it the budget doesnt allow for it.

[markubig]

i've said it before and I'll say it again: An experienced photographer with creativity and a solid grasp of composition, lighting, and technique can probably produce photos from a P&S that I can only dream of producing from my 20D.

Get the camera and the lenses that best suit YOUR needs. If you're a hobbyist, you most likely will not have the equipment requirements of a Sports Illustrated photographer, who in turn might not have the equipment requirements of a highly-touted fashion photographer. If what you have is producing photographs that are pleasing to you, your friends, and your family, then you have the right equipment.

Like you, I am budget conscious when I shop. For now, my uses (as well as my better halfhttp://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif) can't justify $1,000+ for a lens. So when I was looking for a lens, my requirement was "bang for the buck", which is how I came to buying the Tamron 28-75. The Mercedes (24-70 L) would have been great, but the Toyota (Tamron) got me where I needed to go . . . actually, I love my Tamron, so I'm going to refer to it as an Audi.http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/tongue3.gifhttp://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_cool.gifhttp://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/tongue3.gifhttp://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_cool.gif

[mvonditter]

Thank you all again for your input on this. I apologize if I came across as being less than respectful to anyone or if my statements were a little exagerated

I am so blown away by the talent level and the knowledge base of the forum that sometimes I feel very intimidated asking some basic questions. I can honestly say that after your responses to my posting, you have all shown me a great deal of respect and helped me immensely!

Welcome BJ. Here is one for ya...28-135mm IS. Great lense for about $380. For all around shooting it's great for non L glass.:)

[steibeldj]

Welcome BJ. Here is one for ya...28-135mm IS. Great lense for about $380. For all around shooting it's great for non L glass.:)

I second that! Really one of the best values around. If they just updated the IS to the latest gen. it would be a killer.

[Gerdav43]

I will second Markubig on the Tamron 28-75. What a fantastic lens for the price.

I will of course also second mvonditter and steibeldj on the Canon 28-135 IS USM. Not only because I have mine for sale on ebay but because it has been touted as one of the best "non L" walk around lenses on the market (don't hit me everyone, I picked up that term here on this forum). The Canon's advantage is it's range over the Tamron. However, I have found that the Tamron's color, clarity and AF speed to be better. For the budget it really depends on what you have in your stable in terms of a telephoto lense. Since I see that you have the 75-300 USM lens I would lean towards the Tamron. You won't be disappointed and you won't be paying for overlapping ranges.

[Steve Parr]

I personally find it very frustrating that there is little consideration for newbies like myself who can't justify spending more than a couple of hundred bucks per lens

it's just frustrating to never be able to find lens recommendation for enthusiusts on a budget like myself.

John, I'm going to disagree with you.

I have to watch my purchases very closely. For me to "justify" spending gads of money of L-glass, well, I really can't. I'm not a "pro" in the generally accepted form of the word.

I have gotten more advice here than I could shake a stick at, all on lenses in the sub-$500.00 category.

Sure, a lot of guys here talk about their fancy $4,000.00 lenses. I'm assuming that, at least, some of these guys are also paying their mortgage with their camera gear. If and when I ever reach that point, I'm sure I'll post about my $4,000.00 lenses, as well.

Until that time, though, I have no doubt that I'll find an abundance of excellent advice here, provided by people who probably haven't spent less than a grand on a lens in a very long time...

Steve

[robertwgross]

Several years ago, I had a Canon film camera and a couple of ordinary lenses (including the 75-300mm lens). I was going on a safari trip in East Africa, so I got everything together to shoot photos of the many wild animals there.

While there, we had some good weather days and some cloudy days. As a general rule, the 75-300 lens did a fair job when I had plenty of light and the animals were in the right range for it. However, when I applied a 1.4x teleconverter, I had soft images. On cloudy days, I had soft images. So, I was only partly satisfied with my results.

Now, as I look back in retrospect, I see how I could have done a better job with some sharper lenses. OK is OK, but it is nice when you can show some really sharp photo results, especially when you've gone a long distance to shoot something special.

I think that lens will build character.

---Bob Gross---

[DavidEB]

I like the variety of opinions on this forum. There are perfectionists who produce really great shots with their L lenses, and there are some pretty good photographers doing quite well with less expensive gear. With such a wide range of opinion, you are bound to learn something -- I certainly have learned a lot here.

If this forum helps you figure out how to take photos that make you happy, then hang around. I'm taking photos that make me happy with a lens selection that cost me about $1000 -- tamron 280-75 f2.8, sigma 70-200 f2.8 and canon ef 50 f1.8. I bought these mid-cost lenses based largely on advice from this forum. See a selection here (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=74129&highlight=Decision).

The three items that comprise your most important gear should be "L" quality -- these are your eyes, your brain, and your heart.

Kind regards,

David