First SLR (Canon XTi) - Upgrades for the lens?

[guitarlp]

O.K. ... where do we start....

You don't say where you are so we can't talk prices..
You don't say what you like to photograph, so we can't really talk lenses....

However..... A lot of rubbish is talked about the canon kit lens... It is true that there are better lenses in the world. But if you want to spend 2 or 3 thousand pounds/dollars whatever... then feel free.
I asume that (The first and most important rule of life is to assume nothing. As when you do you are almost invariably wrong ... However...) as you are just starting out, what you are looking for is a reasonable all round reliable lens that will work for just about anything. You can use this for a month or two until you find out exactly which direction you want to take with your photography.
You may decide that you want to do landscapes in which case it will have to be light weight. And although you will almost certainly find that a "General all round lens" will not do the specifc stuff you want it too (Macro, Telephoto etc), it must have a good enough range to work woth most situations at least enough for you to form an opinion as to what you actually need.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NateS
Get the 50mm f1.8. I regret not getting the XTI over my D40 for the entire reason of the 50 1.8 lens. Suppossed to be really sharp, really fast and, really inexpensive.

A great lens (I have the f1.4 which is very similar) but not much use for pulling in long shots or wide angles... I have the 17 - 85 IS USM . this a great "walk round " lens But really considering the price, I would wait a while to see if you want one...


My suggestion would be to start with an inexpensive light weight standard zoom like the EFS 18-55 (Even cheaper since you already have one...) invest in a Polariser filter (If in the U.K Jessops do an own brand which is cheap and good quality. A UV filter (Just to protect the lens when no other filter is being used), these tend to be very cheap anyway. And if image stablisation is a problem get a tripod. You can now go out into the world, take heards of pictures develope you taste and your skill and in a few months you will have some idea as to which specific way you want to go.. That will dictate which specific gear you will need to spend great plies of your hard earned cash on.....

Your right... let me give you some more information.

For prices I'm looking at something around $400. I'd be willing to go up to $600 but not over that. $400 is better of course

For the types of pictures I'm going to be taking... I'll probably take 75% of my pictures outdoors in natural sunlight and the other 25% indoors. I like to take pictures of so many different things. On trips I take a lot of pictures of people and building's/architecture. At home I take pictures of the family and family gatherings. If the sky looks interesting I'll take a picture of that. If I like the look of a cobblestone road I'll take a picture of that too. Pretty much anything goes

I got the camera today and I've been enjoying it . It will take me some time to adjust to everything from the normal P&S camera's I've always owned. Off the bat I can already see that I'd like something with a little more zoom. Maybe that 17 - 85 IS USM you mentioned would fit the bill in that category alone. I don't plan on using tripods and wouldn't like to carry one or set one up when I go on trips.

 

[guitarlp]

I have the Canon 17-85mm IS, it's a pretty good upgrade from the kit lens and the IS is pretty good. It still has a smaller max aperture so as long as you don't shoot moving subjects in low light, it's pretty darn good.
I also have the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8. This is a great lens because it has a max aperture of F2.8 (lower number is bigger) for the whole zoom range. This allows me to get faster shutter speeds, which is why I use this lens for weddings, rather than my 17-85mm IS.

So if I go with the Canon 17-85mm IS I'll get more zoom and the image stabilization. But if I go with the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 I'll get faster shutter speeds. In most situations, the Tamron would be the better lens because of the faster shutter speeds right? The only thing I'd be missing with the Tamron would be the zoom?

 

[photelle]

I'd go with the Tamron 28-70 f/2.8. Because honestly? Variable max apertures
(e.g. f/3.5-5.6) suck and I love a good depth of field which you just won't get at most focal lengths with the kit lens. My 85mm f/1.8 is definitely my favourite lens, so sharp! But if you want a zoom, I've head great things about the Tamron.

Have fun!

 

[soylentgreen]

At $500 the 17-85 IS is a great option. I had a difficult time replacing it with a better general-purpose-all-around-lens. It covers a great range from wide to med-telephoto. You will get a tad more zoom with teh 17-85, but nothing too stupendous. The EF EF 28-135 IS is another lens, but a bit short on the wide-angle end. Plenty of reach though. For added range and image quality, I went with the 24-105 f/4L.