Hi everyone. Long time OcUK member but my first post in this sub.
tl;dr - New to the hobby, Canon 550D, people/places/things/landscapes/buildings (everything!), budget <£500 in total, Canon f/1.8 50mm? Sigma f/2.8 17-50mm? Both? Canon f/4.5-5.6 10-18mm? A single something more expensive? Thanks!
I'm an amateur astrophotographer so what I know about photography has come from that direction but is (just about) more than the average Jo(e) on the street. I have a Canon 550D (T2i) that I use for this hobby but I would really like to get into a bit more "conventional" photography because, let's face it, the skies are usually cloudy round here..... My Flickr stream shows you roughly where my ability currently lies.
I currently have just the standard 18-55mm kit lens and I want to upgrade to something a bit different, higher quality. I do already own a reasonable tripod and intervalometer for situations that may require them. My budget is pretty low, perhaps I could convince myself to spend up to £500 in total. I'm not looking for the top top spec glass but something with a notable improvement over the kit lens is what I'm after. Two things that immediately spring to mind are that I am having my first "big trip" away in years heading to Canada in 2 weeks and I'd love to take whatever I get with me. On top of that a friend is doing a very low budget wedding and has asked me (as his only friend with any experience with a camera at all) to take some photos for him. As such my targets are likely to be a mixture of people and landscapes/buildings in a variety of situations. Simple, right?
I've done some reading about "first lenses to upgrade to when you start off with a DSLR" and I've also been considering the "nifty 50" for a long time.
The "Canon EF 50 mm 1.8 STM Lens" for ~£90 seems like a no brainer. I have also been looking at the "Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 EX DC HSM" for ~£280 as a more direct replacement of the kit lens. Obviously at the 50mm length the f/1.8 Canon will likely be superior, but would you guys think in my situation the Sigma alone would be enough to satisfy me? Avoiding buying both and being able to afford something in another focal length range may be preferable?
Finally I have also been considering the "Canon 9519B005AA EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM" as a wide-angle / landscape / whole room lens at ~£180 as it seems well reviewed for the price but I would value your thoughts.
I have also read about things like the "Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Lens" and the "Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Lens" but I feel these are just a little too far out of the price range just now - unless someone can explain to me why I'd be far far better off getting something like these in my situation.
Any advice gratefully received by this novice! Thanks, everybody.
sagramore / Hamish
EDIT: In the time since posting this I have chatted to some friends and done yet more reading. I've started to lean towards getting the 10-18 mm (for some wider shots, landscapes when in Canada, etc) and the 17-50 mm as a kit lens upgrade for more general use - I found a place to get both for under £400. Hopefully the 50mm at f/2.8 will work as a portrait lens until I can afford something else further down the line (85mm prime or similar?). Does that sound like a ridiculous idea? I may have to live without telephoto for now...
tl;dr - New to the hobby, Canon 550D, people/places/things/landscapes/buildings (everything!), budget <£500 in total, Canon f/1.8 50mm? Sigma f/2.8 17-50mm? Both? Canon f/4.5-5.6 10-18mm? A single something more expensive? Thanks!
I'm an amateur astrophotographer so what I know about photography has come from that direction but is (just about) more than the average Jo(e) on the street. I have a Canon 550D (T2i) that I use for this hobby but I would really like to get into a bit more "conventional" photography because, let's face it, the skies are usually cloudy round here..... My Flickr stream shows you roughly where my ability currently lies.
I currently have just the standard 18-55mm kit lens and I want to upgrade to something a bit different, higher quality. I do already own a reasonable tripod and intervalometer for situations that may require them. My budget is pretty low, perhaps I could convince myself to spend up to £500 in total. I'm not looking for the top top spec glass but something with a notable improvement over the kit lens is what I'm after. Two things that immediately spring to mind are that I am having my first "big trip" away in years heading to Canada in 2 weeks and I'd love to take whatever I get with me. On top of that a friend is doing a very low budget wedding and has asked me (as his only friend with any experience with a camera at all) to take some photos for him. As such my targets are likely to be a mixture of people and landscapes/buildings in a variety of situations. Simple, right?
I've done some reading about "first lenses to upgrade to when you start off with a DSLR" and I've also been considering the "nifty 50" for a long time.
The "Canon EF 50 mm 1.8 STM Lens" for ~£90 seems like a no brainer. I have also been looking at the "Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 EX DC HSM" for ~£280 as a more direct replacement of the kit lens. Obviously at the 50mm length the f/1.8 Canon will likely be superior, but would you guys think in my situation the Sigma alone would be enough to satisfy me? Avoiding buying both and being able to afford something in another focal length range may be preferable?
Finally I have also been considering the "Canon 9519B005AA EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM" as a wide-angle / landscape / whole room lens at ~£180 as it seems well reviewed for the price but I would value your thoughts.
I have also read about things like the "Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Lens" and the "Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Lens" but I feel these are just a little too far out of the price range just now - unless someone can explain to me why I'd be far far better off getting something like these in my situation.
Any advice gratefully received by this novice! Thanks, everybody.
sagramore / Hamish
EDIT: In the time since posting this I have chatted to some friends and done yet more reading. I've started to lean towards getting the 10-18 mm (for some wider shots, landscapes when in Canada, etc) and the 17-50 mm as a kit lens upgrade for more general use - I found a place to get both for under £400. Hopefully the 50mm at f/2.8 will work as a portrait lens until I can afford something else further down the line (85mm prime or similar?). Does that sound like a ridiculous idea? I may have to live without telephoto for now...
Last edited: