What is the difference between lenses? (Beginner Question)

[Killjoy]

I currently have a Nikon D3100 with the stock 18-55mm lens.
I'm sure you can tell by the quality of my camera that I am extremely new to DSLR photography.

I was just looking at this article and noticed that the 50mm lens was number two on the list. I was also amazed at the price of that lens.

My questions are... What is that lens used for? Why is it any better/different than my lens? Also for the future, what is an easy way too tell what a lens is used for? ( I know macro and telephoto )

And do any of you have any suggestions as for lenses that I might want to buy in the future for me being such a new photographer and all?

Thank you all very much for your time.

[autofocus]

The 50mm f/1.8 lenses from both Canon and Nikon are very well rated, they're fast, very sharp. and very affordable. On a crop sensor body they work out to be 75mm (Nikon) and 80mm (Canon) which makes them very good portrait lenses. It would be worth having in everyone's bag

[3bayjunkie]

Originally Posted by autofocus

The 50mm f/1.8 lenses from both Canon and Nikon are very well rated, they're fast, very sharp. and very affordable. On a crop sensor body they work out to be 75mm (Nikon) and 80mm (Canon) which makes them very good portrait lenses. It would be worth having in everyone's bag

Dang! You beat me to it! I had to go eat breakfast and look what I miss...

Anyway +1 ^

[Zeke Menuar]

Originally Posted by Killjoy

I currently have a Nikon D3100 with the stock 18-55mm lens.
I'm sure you can tell by the quality of my camera that I am extremely new to DSLR photography.

I was just looking at this article and noticed that the 50mm lens was number two on the list. I was also amazed at the price of that lens.

My questions are... What is that lens used for? Why is it any better/different than my lens? Also for the future, what is an easy way too tell what a lens is used for? ( I know macro and telephoto )

And do any of you have any suggestions as for lenses that I might want to buy in the future for me being such a new photographer and all?

Thank you all very much for your time.

I have a D3100.

I use the 50-200mm telephoto lens most of the time. It's light, reasonably fast and takes great pictures.

I use the kit lens for everything else. The kit lens gets a bum rap. Just because a lens is inexpensive doesn't mean its crap. The kit lens performs way above it's price range. And if you break it, it's not that much to replace it.

I have the 50mm AF lens. It sits most of the time unused. When I bought it the 50mm f1.8 AF-S lens wasn't out yet.
Upon further review I should have waited and bought the 35mm AF-S f1.8 lens. I rented one for a day and it's a better choice as a prime lens for the D3100.

[NicolaB]

The advice I was given on this site when I asked a similar question, was "wait until you know what you need before you rush out and buy. Use you kit lens and see what additional 'features' you need". I ignored that advice as I am too impulsive and as a result probably am £400 lighter in the pocket than I need to be!

Like everything in life, you are paying for the quality of the 'glass'. Better glass, mirrors, basically more research and testing etc. In theory the more expensive the lens, the sharper the picture (photographer dependant ;-) , the less lens flare and distortion you get. You also generally get a wider aperture creating more bokeh etc

I am not familiar with Nikon, but Canon have the kit lens's and the 'L' series glass with a more affordable tier in between.

What lens you choose to buy will depend on what you are planning on shooting.

50mm is what the eye sees (on a full frame camera - yours I would guess is a crop sensor ). Anything higher than that is magnified, anything smaller, a wide lens.

In my bag:
I shoot portraiture and so have the 85mm 1.8mm mostly because it was 'cheap' , good for portraiture and compared very well to the Canon "L" series 85mm. Although this is a beautifully sharp lens, going back to stage one I may have gone for the 50mm to give me the ability to shoot when I am short on space. Most portrait photographers I know have the 50mm in their bag.

EDIT: In addition the 50mm prime means you have to move your feet and helps develop good habbits for getting the right shot. :EDIT

My 85mm rarely comes out of my bag, as my other two "L" series lens's cover the 85mm. It could one day come in handy if I am shooting in low light with plenty of room to back up (as it magnifies and with a av 1.8 it lets in the most light allowing me to keep up my ss).

The 70 - 200 is purrrrrfect for portraiture. It gives great bokeh especially at 200mm and has Image stabilisation for a sharper picture. Yummy.

The 35-70mm gives me the zoom I need to take group shots.

Nikon will have the match to these lens's, but I hope this helps you to understand a little about the uses of some pieces of glass.

In summary, there are lots of lens's to meet the many requirements of photography. A portrait photographer will have different kit to sports of landscape. Indeed, a studio photographer may choose different options to someone who prefers to shoot on location.

hth

[inkista]

Originally Posted by Killjoy

... What is that lens used for?

Typically, portraits or available light shooting. But it can also be used for landscape, streetshooting, whatever you'd use that focal length for. Take a look at the 50mm prime challenge thread.

Why is it any better/different than my lens?

It doesn't zoom.
This lens has a fixed focal length; what we call a "prime" lens. It's mechanically simpler than a zoom lens, and is optimized for the specific focal length it's designed to be. You run around a lot more with a prime. But it'll generally also be smaller, lighter, and less expensive because of its simplicity.

It's sharper.
Because of both the simplicity of the design, and the simplicity of the optical goal. Zoom lenses often have compromises somewhere in the focal length range (i.e., it might be softer at the wide end than at the tele, or exhibit more or less distortion at different points along the range). A prime only has to work really well at a single focal length. This doesn't mean that all primes are sharper than zooms--in fact zooms can be just as good; but they'll typically cost a whole lot more.

It's faster.
The maximum aperture is the other technical spec on a lens you really have to pay attention to. All lenses can be closed ("stopped") down to a smaller aperture setting, but not all can be opened up to the wider ones. Your kit lens's maximum aperture @55mm is f/5.6. A 50/1.8 can open up to f/1.8. That's 2.3 stops wider, which means it can let in 10x the amount of light via aperture. That's the equivalent of using a tenth the iso or shutter speed to get the same exposure. So, it's more useful in lower light situations.

It also can create a thinner depth of field, to blur out the background more. The fastest zooms in the Nikon mount stop at f/2.8. But Nikon primes can go to f/1.2.

It isn't stabilized.
Unlike your 18-55, it has no VR. You're going to need to learn the 1/focal_length rule for shutter speeds to mitigate camera shake blur. Your low shutter speed limit with this lens is likely to be around 1/30s - 1/60s.

Also for the future, what is an easy way too tell what a lens is used for? ( I know macro and telephoto )

Focal length and max. aperture will determine it for most folks, but it also depends on how you frame and your preferred working distances, and whether or not you use a flash. The easiest way is to learn about lenses, and to figure out how you use them. EXIF can help you determine what focal length ranges you use a lot.

And do any of you have any suggestions as for lenses that I might want to buy in the future for me being such a new photographer and all?

Not unless you say what it is you want to shoot and why your current gear won't cut it, and how much you've got to spend.

The point here is not to find the best gear evah. But to find the best fit for what and how you like to shoot and your budget. Start with what frustrates you the most about the gear you already have, and make sure that it's not a technique issue--that it really is the gear that's creating the issue. Kit lenses get a bad rap, but they're actually good lenses, and if you learn to work within their limitations, they can still deliver the goods.

Most camera gear outperforms the photographer.

[3bayjunkie]

although it is subtle unless you crop at 100% even the most expensive zoom lens is out done by a prime as far as sharpness.

Juza Nature Photography

http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/article...ew_samples.htm

I just realized i didn't post the link for the 600mm 100% crop:
http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/article...usm_review.htm

^^^see link for examples at 100% crop^^^