Hey @pody - It really depends on the subject you're intending to shoot. For example, if you're interested in portraits, I really like the 50mm f/1.4 or 85mm f/1.8. For landscapes, I like the Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5. For sports, the 70-200mm f/2.8 works great in all lighting situations. If you favor a particular type of photography and have a budget in mind, I can suggest some lenses to choose from. All the best!
I agree also, it really depends on the subject you're intending to shoot. I am retired and on a budget, so I only have the 2 supplied lenses, EFS 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 and the EFS 55-250mm f/4-5.6. I am interested in a variety of photography such as portraits, street, landscapes and natural subjects such as lightning, astronomy and steam trains. Lenses that offer f/1.8 I believe can be very expensive. f/2.8 may be a little better price wise. Please comment. Regards
Actually, other than the Sigma 18-35mm, every single f/1.8 lens is a prime lens and most if them are very affordable, especially the 50mm. When you look into primes that are f/1.4 or larger, that's when the prices shoot up. All f/2.8 lenses are professional zooms (i.e., 14-24mm, 24-70mm, and 70-200mm) and these are the among the more expensive lenses that are not exotics.
So, if I understand correctly a prime lens is a fixed f stop? Are you saying you would recommend a prime lens for shooting landscapes? I'd appreciate your thoughts. Haven't even taken my T5i out of the box. I have a few lenses from the T3i I traded in. Excited to get shooting.
No, a prime lens is a fixed focal length. What @ohyeahar is saying is that nobody makes zoom lenses faster than f/2.8, so if you want anything faster it must be prime.
Most of the time you do not want a very large aperture for landscapes, because you want more, rather than less, depth of field, and most of the time the kit zoom may well be adequate. A large aperture prime is nice for portraits, where limited depth of field can help isolate a subject.
It's been a while since I did lightning on film, but when I did, I usually found something around f/8, time exposed with ISO 100 film worked about right. So again, the kit zoom might turn out to be fine for that.
Comments
I am retired and on a budget, so I only have the 2 supplied lenses, EFS 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 and the EFS 55-250mm f/4-5.6.
I am interested in a variety of photography such as portraits, street, landscapes and natural subjects such as lightning, astronomy and steam trains.
Lenses that offer f/1.8 I believe can be very expensive. f/2.8 may be a little better price wise.
Please comment.
Regards
All f/2.8 lenses are professional zooms (i.e., 14-24mm, 24-70mm, and 70-200mm) and these are the among the more expensive lenses that are not exotics.
Most of the time you do not want a very large aperture for landscapes, because you want more, rather than less, depth of field, and most of the time the kit zoom may well be adequate. A large aperture prime is nice for portraits, where limited depth of field can help isolate a subject.
It's been a while since I did lightning on film, but when I did, I usually found something around f/8, time exposed with ISO 100 film worked about right. So again, the kit zoom might turn out to be fine for that.