Cannon 50mm 1.4 or 18-200mm 3.5-5.6

[rossim2i2]

Hi Everyone,

This is my first post here. I've always been interested in photography and finally got around to purchasing my first DSLR camera for Christmas I ended up getting the Cannon T2i with the kit lens and the 430 EX II flash (I figured it was more important to get the flash over a better lens at first). I've been taking some (what I consider) great shots with it and am really enjoying my new toys.

I'm now debating what lens I should get next. I originally wanted to get the 18-200mm as it sounds as if it is a great lens that you really never have to change since you have the wide angle and telephoto. However, lately I've been reading how many people swear by the 50mm and primary shoot with it.

I'm mainly shooting family get-togethers right now, but would like to start shooting outside more (scenery and landscapes). What are your thoughts on these lenses? I think I'd like to eventually get both, but I'm still not sure which one to get first.

Thanks!

[RichardTaylor]

Wait until you run up against the limits of your existing equipment.

Then you will know if you need a fast lens for hand held available light shooting, or to give you shallow DOF.

Or on the landscape side of things, if you need wider to get more in/change your perspective or you want the convenience of a "one lens solution"

I only use my "super zoom" when I do have to travel very light (one lens/body) and I do not know exactly what I will be shooting. They tend to be (for hand held use) good light lenses only and you do take a hit in IQ and focussing speed.

[rossim2i2]

After reading more reviews and seeing how inexpensive the 50mm 1.8 was, I picked it up. Came in today. The depth of field is amazing! Now time to save up for a new one!

[retro_pony]

Incidentally, I was in a similar debate, choosing the 50mm vs an all-around lens - but something I learned. Had a number of photog friends selling me on getting a 50 as a "must have." However. after traveling this past year, I realized the benefits of a one lens setup (of course, still maybe packing another lens or two just in case). Convenience winning out over quality. BUT, with the price of a 50 1.8 a quarter of the 1.4, I found I could do both. Really enjoying the benefits and capabilities of both.

By on to my point. I am a growing fan of shallow depths of field. I purchased the 1.8 50 - while a friend received the 1.4 50 for Christmas. Had an opportunity to test both. the 1.4 is a beautiful (and much larger in comparison) piece of glass. However, after doing some test shots - the DOF of the 1.4 was almost too much (or too little). Looking forward to getting to know my 50 a little better, but not disappointed with the decision to purchase.

[RichardTaylor]

@ rossim2i2

Good choice

[olgieshmolgie]

i just bought that lens and am waiting on it to get here! Cant wait to shoot my next client with it!

[rossim2i2]

The depth of field on the lens is amazing. I was worried about the 50mm as I thought it would not be wide enough, but its manageable. Low light shots inside came out great, even without my external flash! Can't wait to get it outside and start playing with it.

For a beginner, like myself, I also think the prime lens will force me to move around and look for different angles to shoot at. I found myself very stationary with the zoom lens.

[el_vago32]

Before you get on the lens-buying-race take the great piece of advice RichardTaylor gave you on this thread: "Wait until you run up against the limits of your existing equipment."

Trust me, there's so much you can do using only the kit lens and "nifty fifty".

Happy shooting!