Noob question regarding body and lens

[Noobinitup]

good afternoon all,

SUPERnoob here. just started learning about photography and getting really into it. Currently just have a olympus c8080 which i use in an underwater rig for my scuba diving, and a simple P&S canon A590IS. Bought scott kelby's 3 books as well as a few others and am getting ready to make a big jump into DSLR photography with my first camera purchase.
I am inquring to see if people feel that it is better to get a cheaper body (for instance Rebel XS) and invest heavily in a great lens (for instance EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS ) or is better as a supernoob to get a good, solid camera and lens intro kit and focus on just learning how to shoot in the beginning then worry about lens upgrades later.
I am looking at either the first option mentioned above or investing in a Canon T2i kit, or T3i kit.
also any other books ppl feel would greatly help would be appreciated.
I like to jump into hobbys both feet first and really am a sponge when it comes to information.
it is appreciated.

 

[The_Traveler]

Any 18-200 may be a good walk around lens but it is not a great lens, no hyperzoom can be.
Start with a decent body and decent lens then opt for better glass.

 

[iolair]

It's unlikely you'll ever regret investing in a good lens.

What's a good lens for you depends on the type of photography you'll be doing - but any zoom with as big a range as the 18-200 will have had compromises made in its construction that limit how good the image quality can be. Decent lens + cheap body is not a bad way to start though ...

What do you see yourself shooting? If you're keen to learn, I think there's a lot to be said for a prime lens ... the opportunity for good image quality, but also as you can't do "lazy" framing like it's tempting to do with a zoom, it forces you to move around a bit more and think about your composition.

For no more money than the zoom you suggested, you could buy the 35mm/2.0 and the 50mm/1.8 ... or the 50mm/1.8 and the 85mm/1.8 ... (depending on what kind of shots you see yourself doing) ... these would not be bad places to start at all.

 

[KmH]

It really takes both good glass and a good camera body, particularly if you are wanting to use Canon gear.

The XS, and other entry-level Canon bodies, don't have Spot metering mode, don't allow the metering to follow the chosen focus point, and don't have a metering system that is color-aware.

The reason superzooms (11x+ zoom range) cannot be great lenses image quality wise, is many design compromises that decrease image qiuality have to be made to achieve the massive 11x+ zoom range.

The image quality issues are at their worst at the extremes of the lens' range of focal length, lens aperture, and focus distance. For instance, if you use a superzoom at it's maximum focal length, widest aperture and closest focus distance, all at the same time, you are adding together all the design compromises the lens designers had to accommodate, so image quality suffers the most.

 

[Noobinitup]

thank you guys for chiming in, it is very informative information.
So based on what you are saying, should I invest in a Canon T2i and then look at getting a couple refurbished lenses off the canon site?
this seems like it would be giving me varying functionality while providing a solid body base to work off of.
I was also looking at the nikon d3000 but seems like for my dollar range (500-1000) that the T2i with a lens would be the best investment?
I will be shooting alot of landscape and portait. Mainly my 9 month old son but i also go to the beach alot and just will be taking the camera whever i go basically. I would like to get to the point where i can use this for a few years then trade it in for something even better when i get more competant.
the T2i seems like a strong all around option, i could purchase just the body then if ppl could recommend a couple lenses to start with that would be very helpful!!
Thanks again keep the input coming, it helps me learn even more

 

[Raian-san]

Do you care about video? If not I think most people would agree that the Nikon D90 would be a better option than the T2i. You can find a relatively good price for a used D90 and buy a decent lens to go with it like the new 35mm 1.8G or 50mm 1.8G or the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8. The 35mm and 50mm are prime lens so you can not zoom. 50mm on a D90 is 75mm and in most indoor places, there's not enough room so the 35mm would be ideal if you shoot a lot indoor with tighter spaces. The Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 is a good walk around lens that's very good price for it's performance. Since you mention landscape, I would suggest the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 lens.

If you care about video, then D90 has a horrible video mode. It does have 720P but video is very choppy imo. I sold my D90 with the 17-105mm kit lens for $760. So without the lens you can find one around $650 or so and invest in the Tamron which is around 300-350ish used and you're set to start off.

 

[Noobinitup]

Do you care about video? If not I think most people would agree that the Nikon D90 would be a better option than the T2i. You can find a relatively good price for a used D90 and buy a decent lens to go with it like the new 35mm 1.8G or 50mm 1.8G or the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8. The 35mm and 50mm are prime lens so you can not zoom. 50mm on a D90 is 75mm and in most indoor places, there's not enough room so the 35mm would be ideal if you shoot a lot indoor with tighter spaces. The Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 is a good walk around lens that's very good price for it's performance. Since you mention landscape, I would suggest the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 lens.

If you care about video, then D90 has a horrible video mode. It does have 720P but video is very choppy imo. I sold my D90 with the 17-105mm kit lens for $760. So without the lens you can find one around $650 or so and invest in the Tamron which is around 300-350ish used and you're set to start off.

video matters zip to me, strictly using for photos.
so a nikon d90? whats the diff between a tamron and a nikon lens?

 

[subscuck]

The XS, and other entry-level Canon bodies, don't have Spot metering mode, don't allow the metering to follow the chosen focus point, and don't have a metering system that is color-aware.

The T2i and T3i do indeed have spot metering and iFCL (Canon's version of color aware metering).

 

[subscuck]

I think most people would agree that the Nikon D90 would be a better option than the T2i.

You mean most people who shoot Nikon, right?

 

[Raian-san]

Do you care about video? If not I think most people would agree that the Nikon D90 would be a better option than the T2i. You can find a relatively good price for a used D90 and buy a decent lens to go with it like the new 35mm 1.8G or 50mm 1.8G or the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8. The 35mm and 50mm are prime lens so you can not zoom. 50mm on a D90 is 75mm and in most indoor places, there's not enough room so the 35mm would be ideal if you shoot a lot indoor with tighter spaces. The Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 is a good walk around lens that's very good price for it's performance. Since you mention landscape, I would suggest the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 lens.

If you care about video, then D90 has a horrible video mode. It does have 720P but video is very choppy imo. I sold my D90 with the 17-105mm kit lens for $760. So without the lens you can find one around $650 or so and invest in the Tamron which is around 300-350ish used and you're set to start off.

video matters zip to me, strictly using for photos.
so a nikon d90? whats the diff between a tamron and a nikon lens?

Nikon is the original, Tamron is a 3rd party lens. The difference is quality, Nikon definitely better in quality but cost 3x the price. But many people who have owned a Tamron 17-50mm have given it many praises and I'm about to order my own as well. At around $300 something, it's probably the best bang for your buck zoom lens. If you want anything that's better in quality, you'll probably spend much more.

 

[David-Wayne]

Sell your boat and get a d700 and a 24-70. You'll never regret it! (unless you like boating, then you'll regret it every weekend)

 

[Derrel]

I think most people would agree that the Nikon D90 would be a better option than the T2i.

You mean most people who shoot Nikon, right?

I think he meant "most sensible people"...

 

[Noobinitup]

Ok now im confussssed

as a newb, should I be looking at a nikon D90 body and lens setup, or a t2i/t3i body with lens setup?
such a big decision, does it realy come down to personal preference?

 

[analog.universe]

People tend to intensely prefer one brand or the other, which is fine... but they also tend to intensely recommend one brand over another, which isn't always as sensible. I think at the high end, when you know what you need, and you're pushing the gear to the limit, there are definite technological advantages of one over the other, depending on application. I think however for the models we're talking about, and the amount of experience you have, the ergonomics of the device are more important, and that is entirely personal preference. The best thing you can do is go to a shop, play with both of them, and get the one that makes the most sense to you. People often disagree with my perspective on this, but again, I consider that personal preference as well. For some folks having the best performance is most important (even if only by a couple %), for myself, having gear that I enjoy using and that feels intuitive is most important.

 

[tyler_h]

There is a lot of personal preference involved. Who is technically better at different price points changes all the time.

There are some things when you specialise that are available for on brand and not the other; like the 400mm f/5.6L and the TS-E 17mm f/4L and at the same time Nikon has the 14-24mm f/2.8 etc etc