Which lens would you reccomend for a beginner?

Some of you may already know I'm on my way to getting a DSLR and right now I'm purely researching ready for the big day. For now I've decided I'll buy a XT with a kit lens. I'm really liking the look of the 50mm 1.8 also, so I wonder if I'd be better off skipping the kit lens and get the body only and just get the 50mm 1.8 to go with it? I assume the 50mm is a fixed focal which would be no chance of any kind of zoom.

So, is there any other good "cheap" lens aside from the 50mm 1.8 and the 18-55mm kit lens??

Get the kit lens and the 50 1.8 to start with - then start saving! I got the 17-40 to replace the kit lens, but I still use my kit lens on occasion - it's no where near as bad as it's made out to be.

My fave lens is the 70-200 f/4 tho - truly amazing and a great price.

I would shop around for the best possible price on body only and then get either a Sigma 17-70mm DC Macro or Tamron 18-50 2.8. I have been very impressed with the Sigma as a practical general walkaround and travel style lens. I have a fab 17-40mm L but the Sigma has pretty much replaced it due to its very close image quality and extra range.

It depends on what type of photography you are interested in, this will determine what lens you should buy. Landscapes need a wider lens and nature needs a longer lens.
Buy the Kit lens and the 50mm 1.8 this will give you a good base then once you decide on the type of photography interests you most buy the appropriate lens that fits in your budget.

Wayne

steved110 wrote in post #2184712
Get the kit lens and the 50 1.8 to start with - then start saving! I got the 17-40 to replace the kit lens, but I still use my kit lens on occasion - it's no where near as bad as it's made out to be.

My fave lens is the 70-200 f/4 tho - truly amazing and a great price.

Yup, the little but much maligned kit is a surprisingly good lens. So is the 50 f/1.8.

Subsequently the 17-40 and 70-200 f/4, as outlined by Steve, should be considered. I think those two are the highest value/$ L lenses with no compromises made in their build and performance.

start with just the kit lens.
No point in buying a second until you're fully familiar with what it and the camera can do, and are able to decide where to go next (wide, tele, macro, etc.) from a position of experience .

I'm into all sorts of shooting. I really like macro/fake macro type stuff. I also love to do portraits when kids sit still long enough. I also like to do bird shots. So really things right across the shooting spectrum

I agree on the 17-70 Macro I used one last weekend and it blew me away, Still wont sway me from getting an EF though , but sure all those that people have said are great lens's
even the Kit, Main thing is..... you have fun

Cam

I also agree to get the kit lens, and if you can spare the $$ get the 50mm f/1.8 also (having a prime always helps). The 50 f/1.8 can also be good for macro if you get a Kenko extension tube set (something to keep in mind).
Good luck with your new camera

If you want to start with a "prime" lens (a non-zoom), the best suggestion would be something in the 28mm to 31mm range, as that is the "normal" lens focal length for Canon APS-C DSLR's.

In the "olden days", 35mm film cameras all were usually supplied with a 50mm lens, as that was the accepted "normal" lens focal length for the 35mm film format. The equivalent focal length for the APS-C format is 31mm.

A 50mm lens on the APS-C format is a short telephoto lens, and would be a bit long to be the only lens someone owns. You'd often have a very tough time using it indoors.

ef 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
affordable lens for the beginnner.

if you could do w/o USM, the tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 SP Di, or their 17-50mm f/2.8 SP Di-II.

I say the 17-85IS, Sigma 17-70 or the Tamron 17-50 would be my choices. I think you will out grow the lens kit real fast. But it is not a bad lens for the $$..

Get the Tamron 17-50 or the Sigma 17-70. Either one would be fine for the beginner. I'd also invest in a good flash as well, such as the 430EX for those kid portraits.

A flash is certainly an excellent idea, and they are really easy to use, at least in basic mode.

Here is a link to more in depth discussion of Eos Flash if you are interested - it's worth bookmarking for later on regardless!

http://photonotes.org/​articles/eos-flash/

For me I got the body only then a SIGMA 18-125mm just to get me started then I got the 50mm 1.8.

Then when funds allowed I went for the 17-40mm L and never looked back.

But like others say decide what you want to snap then get the lens for the job.

R