Please tell me if this 1 more expensive lens could be used to garner the same or better quality images than 3 less expensive lenses that I am looking at - 35mm prime f/2.4, 50mm prime f/1.8, the kit 18-55mm lens. I am on a budget and new to SLRs...thanks in advance. Please tell me if this 1 more expensive lens could be used to garner the same or better quality images than 3 less expensive lenses that I am looking at - 35mm prime f/2.4, 50mm prime f/1.8, the... » Read More Please tell me if this 1 more expensive lens could be used to garner the same or better quality images than 3 less expensive lenses that I am looking at - 35mm prime f/2.4, 50mm prime f/1.8, the kit 18-55mm lens. I am on a budget and new to SLRs...thanks in advance. « Show Less
1825169
I agree as well with the others. I own the Tamron and love the lens. Very sharp and works great for general use but the 50 I have heard is a great lens. If you don't mind using your feet instead of a zoom you should be good starting with the prime.
450058
To be honest, you should get the 50mm 1.8 lens first. You can take absolutely stunning photos with that lens that don't come close to the lenses you mentioned. The 18-55mm kit lens would be my last choice.
1825170
I agree with the previous comment. The Tamron lens is a good 'general' lens for your bag. The kit lens is worthless in my opinion and should be avoided at all cost. Your 50mm 1.4 is my recommendation.
759248
We thank everyone for there suggestions. We went to the 50 1.4 for a fast lens. Having not used our 17-40 that often, no need to spend mucho money on the 16-35.
987142
I owned the 50D and now own a 7D. I have had my 17-55 f/1.8 IS for over 2 years. I bought the 24-105 a year ago to replace my 17-55 hahaha yea let me say right now I am not selling my 17-55 and when shooting indoors the 17-55 f/2.8 is will be my first choice over the 24-105 f/4 IS. Indoors f/4 is slow period. I ended up buying a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 to shoot indoors for low light and I LOVE it. Anyways on a crop body I would pick the 17-55 f/2.8 IS over the 24-105 f/4 IS for indoors unless its a really well lit room or I am using my 580 EXII. I am leaning to primes anymore and would recommend the 17-55 f/2.8 for you. Another option is Sigma 30 f/1.4 and the Canon 85 f/1.8 and you spend less then either of those lenses heck you can throw in a 50 f/1.8 and have 3 lenses for the price of 1 if you don't mind switching lenses. Nick
608537
Since I don't have the 18-55 I can't compare. But let me say that the 23 is an excellent prime lens which, in daylight, autofocuses almost instantaneously. In dim light, such as twilight, it may (although not necessarily) hunt around in order to find focus. But that would occur just as well with other excellent lenses including Canon L which I also happen to have. In those situations, experienced amateurs will at once shift to manual focus without dropping a beat.
1974651
I've had the 50mm 1.8 and the kit lens, and I can definitely say this will blow both of them away! This is essentially a high-quality upgrade from the kit lens, and in my opinion gives at least as good an image result as the 50mm prime - but with the range of a zoom. The 35mm I don't have experience with, but I would still bet that the Sigma would compete just fine :)
1373624
If you are willing to fork out $500 - $550, I highly recommend the SAL 18250 (This is the best range I have found so far for the A350). This lens is SOLID, no drift, extremely quick focusing. If you don't want to schlep around those low quality "kit lens's", just buy the sony body and invest in this GREAT lens. Pic quality turns out great!! I have had this now for almost 4 months. Took it on a trip to Alaska and found it extremely versatile, going from wide to telephoto. The convenience factor alone (of not having to swap lens's) means a reduction in camera inside gunk that can spot up your pics, and easy shooting under any situation. If you are willing to fork out $500 - $550, I highly recommend the SAL 18250 (This is the best range I have found so far for the A350). This lens is SOLID, no drift, extremely quick focusing. If you don't want to schlep around those low quality "kit lens's", just buy the sony body and invest in this GREAT lens. Pic quality turns out great!! I have had this now for almost 4 months. Took it on a trip to Alaska and found it extremely versatile, going from wide to telephoto. The convenience factor alone (of not having to swap lens's) means a reduction in camera inside gunk that can... » Read More If you are willing to fork out $500 - $550, I highly recommend the SAL 18250 (This is the best range I have found so far for the A350). This lens is SOLID, no drift, extremely quick focusing. If you don't want to schlep around those low quality "kit lens's", just buy the sony body and invest in this GREAT lens. Pic quality turns out great!! I have had this now for almost 4 months. Took it on a trip to Alaska and found it extremely versatile, going from wide to telephoto. The convenience factor alone (of not having to swap lens's) means a reduction in camera inside gunk that can spot up your pics, and easy shooting under any situation. « Show Less
405
Thanks everyone for your help. You've explained a lot and it really helps. After your explanations, I looked at my past photos. I'm thinking that maybe the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 will fill my needs. Thanks again.
120648
If money is a concern, try the "fantastic plastic" or sometimes called the "nifty fifty". That's the Canon EOS 50mm f/1.8. Great lens. Best optics per dollar, for sure. Only complaint people have had has been about the quality of background blur when shooting wide open. I haven't had an issue personally, it's acceptable for the price. It IS rather ugly compared to the quality of bokeh on the f/1.2L .. But you can buy 15 of the 1.8s for the price of the 1.2, so that's to be expected. The 1.4 has had some great reviews as well.
1041296
The 35mm f1.4 is amazing. The photos I gets are out of this world. I'm saving now for the 56mm f1.2. Prime lenses are pretty much all I work with.
1838717
This lens is quite shart at it's focal length. Not take away from this lens but I have actually started to favor the 135L prime lens in terms of sharpness. It obviously requires much more room to get your subject in range (outdoors generally) but the picture come out sharp with a nice Bokeh.As you mentioned, the 35mm is a must have focal length and the sharpness of this lens won't disappoint. I would post an example but I am responding by mobile. You can probably find examples with a quick google image search.
1135869
Hey there.I would suggest an exercise if you have the 18-55, but want to start shooting primarily with a fixed focus prime lens. Set the 18-55 to 50, and take shots for the next week only at that length...50 serious shots should give you an idea if you like it as a walkaround. Since there is a really nice sony 35mm lens as well, try that length out also. Personally I like 24mm or 35mm as a walkaround, 50mm is a little too telescopic but it is a very personal preferance.
464450
The quality of a prime lens is always much better than the quality of a kit zoom lens. And since the kit zoom lens has a variable aperture you cant throw the background out of focus since the max aperture is 5.6 or 6.3 or a very wide depth of field. With a f1.4 lens (like this one) you can shoot in shade, or nighttime or darker areas that would be impossible to shoot in with the zoom unless you increase the ISO way up which will result in less noise. Dont rely on a zoom. Use your feet to get the shot and use a prime lens and it will make you a much better photographer. The pros all use prime lenses like this 35mm equivalent lens on their cameras for street shots. The quality of a prime lens is always much better than the quality of a kit zoom lens. And since the kit zoom lens has a variable aperture you cant throw the background out of focus since the max aperture is 5.6 or 6.3 or a very wide depth of field. With a f1.4 lens (like this one) you can shoot in shade, or nighttime or darker areas that would be impossible to shoot in with the zoom unless you increase the ISO way up which will result in less noise. Dont rely on a zoom. Use your feet to get the shot and use a prime lens and it will make you a much better photographer. The pros all use... » Read More The quality of a prime lens is always much better than the quality of a kit zoom lens. And since the kit zoom lens has a variable aperture you cant throw the background out of focus since the max aperture is 5.6 or 6.3 or a very wide depth of field. With a f1.4 lens (like this one) you can shoot in shade, or nighttime or darker areas that would be impossible to shoot in with the zoom unless you increase the ISO way up which will result in less noise. Dont rely on a zoom. Use your feet to get the shot and use a prime lens and it will make you a much better photographer. The pros all use prime lenses like this 35mm equivalent lens on their cameras for street shots. « Show Less
320072
Your image quality will be second to none when comparing against the 28-300. We have the 35, 50 and 85 (all 1.8), and we couldn't be happier. May look into selling the 28-300 and getting a 70-200 in addition to the 3 primes.
1264580
Well there are two different "kit" lenses the 18-55 and the 18-135. Now the 18-55 is not a "bad" lens but most people skip that and buy either a different Sony lens,a Sigma or Tamron lens. Pretty much because the 18-55 is a "ok" start out lens but not even a year down the road you will most likely want to upgrade. Now the 18-135 alot of people seem to be happy with, it is more money, but it will probably save your money in the long run. But remember this item is BODY ONLY , so no lens came with this one!!! Make sure you find one with the lens included if that's the route you want to go! Well there are two different "kit" lenses the 18-55 and the 18-135. Now the 18-55 is not a "bad" lens but most people skip that and buy either a different Sony lens,a Sigma or Tamron lens. Pretty much because the 18-55 is a "ok" start out lens but not even a year down the road you will most likely want to upgrade. Now the 18-135 alot of people seem to be happy with, it is more money, but it will probably save your money in the long run. But remember this item is BODY ONLY , so no lens came with this one!!! Make sure you find one with the lens included if that's... » Read More Well there are two different "kit" lenses the 18-55 and the 18-135. Now the 18-55 is not a "bad" lens but most people skip that and buy either a different Sony lens,a Sigma or Tamron lens. Pretty much because the 18-55 is a "ok" start out lens but not even a year down the road you will most likely want to upgrade. Now the 18-135 alot of people seem to be happy with, it is more money, but it will probably save your money in the long run. But remember this item is BODY ONLY , so no lens came with this one!!! Make sure you find one with the lens included if that's the route you want to go! « Show Less
305771
Image quality if very good and exceeds any other zoom I have at 28mm... but primes will generally outperform zooms at their given lengths. Also, the 28-300 shows significant distortion with edge softness at 28mm and will not perform well in low light, whereas the 28 1.8 is strong on both fronts. The 28 1.8 produces good and completely usable images at 1.8 and razor sharp images starting at 2.8 from my experience.
1872897
I would agree with Nav3000. With this camera, I'd go for a nice lens if you can afford one. The 24-70mm 2.8 and the 70-200mm 2.8 are probably your best options as far as versatility and the focal length would pretty much cover you for everything. The image quality of the 85mm 1.4 is outstanding, but is difficult in tight spaces. But if you are looking for something less expensive I would look into the 50mm 1.4 - but its a prime lens so you have to be OK with using your feet to zoom. If it were me, I wouldn't waste the money on the kit lenses. If at all humanly possible I would get the nicest lens I could afford because the image quality is SO worth it. I would agree with Nav3000. With this camera, I'd go for a nice lens if you can afford one. The 24-70mm 2.8 and the 70-200mm 2.8 are probably your best options as far as versatility and the focal length would pretty much cover you for everything. The image quality of the 85mm 1.4 is outstanding, but is difficult in tight spaces. But if you are looking for something less expensive I would look into the 50mm 1.4 - but its a prime lens so you have to be OK with using your feet to zoom. If it were me, I wouldn't waste the money on the kit lenses. If at all humanly possible I would get the... » Read More I would agree with Nav3000. With this camera, I'd go for a nice lens if you can afford one. The 24-70mm 2.8 and the 70-200mm 2.8 are probably your best options as far as versatility and the focal length would pretty much cover you for everything. The image quality of the 85mm 1.4 is outstanding, but is difficult in tight spaces. But if you are looking for something less expensive I would look into the 50mm 1.4 - but its a prime lens so you have to be OK with using your feet to zoom. If it were me, I wouldn't waste the money on the kit lenses. If at all humanly possible I would get the nicest lens I could afford because the image quality is SO worth it. « Show Less
773131
I would say get the 18-55 and use the $150 difference toward a 55-250 while you are starting out. You will probably want something longer than 135mm regardless, and depending on how far you go with your photography, there may come a point where none of the three lenses mentioned in this post is "good enough" anymore. ;)