Canon Lens for Africa

[theaaguy]

I wonder if you could offer me some advice. I currently own a Panasonic Lumix FZ38 and have had some success with it. But recently after reading about depth of field discovered that no matter what I tweek it won't give me a crisp image with blurry background. The camera does go down to f2.8 but still the background is in focus. After discovering this and some other features that are lacking I've been doing some research into buying another camera. The camera doesn't offer a bulb setting either and I would so much like to capture the star movement in the night sky.

My family and I will be working in Uganda for the charity Amigos.org.uk at the beginning of Feb for 3 months and I'm thinking about what would be the best camera and lens for such a trip. I've searched the sites and decided on a Canon 600D. My question to you is, do you think think I should buy just the body and attach a canon 18-135 lens (I'd love an 18-200 but budget won't allow) or should I buy the camera with the stock 18-55 and also get a 55-200. I did consider the Tamron 18-200 but after reading several reviews decided against it. Or do you think the Tamron lense would be a suitable lens to go with.

For years I've only shot with a point and shoot until buying the Lumix and so don't have much of a professional eye when it comes to image quality.

Do you think the 18-135 will serve me for most conditions as I'm a bit apprehensive about changing lenses in a dusty environment and not sure about the quality of a 55-200 as it sells for allot less than the 18-135.

Would really appreciate your thought.

Many thanks.

Guy

[gturner]

How much time do you have to learn SLR before your trip?
If none, then consider keeping your current camera.

I would go 50mm 1,8 and 18-135

[armis]

I used to have a Sigma 18-250 (actually still do, but can't use it anymore), retails for about $500. It's not a very popular lens because it's not very good in any respect - sharpness, max aperture, etc. - but the one thing that it has going for it is that you'll never have to switch lenses.

Unless you want to take pictures in low-light, in which case that 50 f/1.8 is your best friend.

Also, consider getting stuff second-hand for your first DSLR.

[theaaguy]

Thanks for the advice guys. I hadn't considered a 50mm f1.8. What I like about the 600d is that it has plenty of instruction and a fail safe mode for times when I don't know what to do. I just don't want to come back with a disk full of naff pictures and regretting not going over armed with something decent to capture our time there.

[AndyM2020]

With regards to Depth of Field - firstly, it is dependant upon the focal length. At wider focal lengths you have more depth of field than you do at the other end. So getting further away with a longer focal length should help a little. Secondly, the aperture on the FZ38 is not constant and goes from f/2.8 at the wide end to f/4.4 at the telephoto end. But even at f/4.4, you should (I believe) still get a shallower DoF when at the longer focal length. As a side note, the sensor is smaller than a DSLR (even a crop sensor in the 600D), which will not allow for as shallow a DoF as a larger sensor does.

Will you be shooting wildlife when you're out there? The FZ38 has a 35mm/full frame zoom equivalent of 27mm - 486mm and that ability to zoom to 486mm will be handy when shooting animals in the bush. If you take the 600D, you will need a telephoto or zoom lens of 300mm to get an equivalent to 480mm on its 1.6x crop sensor. This will mean that you will have to lug the body and possibly two or more lenses around with you, rather than just the Lumix.

Personally, I think if I were going on such a trip, I would take the 600D despite the extra hassle. I would consider a "standard" zoom of around 24-70mm and a telephoto zoom of 70-300mm. The "L" versions of these will be expensive, but would allow you a shallower DoF, the "prosumer" versions will not have the constant f/2.8 apertures, but will be cheaper and lighter to transport and carry. If you do need a lens that is going to give you a shallow DoF, then the 50mm f/1.8 (AKA the "nifty fifty") is cheap, small and lightweight and will be fine for general use and portraits, etc., but not for wildlife.