So, after falling in love with my uncle's XT, I've decided to take the dSLR plunge...

[bastetbabe27]

I currently have an FZ5, and I've been really happy with it. I love the long zoom, and it's been a great camera for learning about digital photography. But after analyzing what has frustrated me about the camera, I think it's time to move to a dSLR.

I got a chance to look at the XTi yesterday, and I really like the feel of it. For my small hands, it's a better size than most dSLRs, and I didn't mind the plastic body. I like to take pictures while I travel, so smaller and lighter is better.

It'll be awhile before I have any money to buy a dSLR, but I was wanting recommendations on suggested lenses to get for a dSLR newbie. I've heard the kit lens on the XTi isn't that good, so I'd rather just get the body and buy 1 or 2 lenses separately.

In the past I've mostly taken pictures when I travel, so I take pics of many different things, including landscapes, architecture, museum objects (I'm an classics/art history major planning on a career in art conservation/restoration), people, etc.

When at home, I do more macro and indoor photos of family and friends. I like no flash photos/available light photography at parties (and in general), because I think it captures the ambience better than 'nuking' subjects with a flash. Also, since I'm often shooting in museums, I have to take pics without flash, b/c of museum restrictions.

So, I'm thinking I need some sort of good, 'most'-purpose zoom lens, and maybe a fast 'prime' lens for indoor/ available light shots.

Any suggestions?

-bastetbabe27

[bascom]

What frustrated you about the FZ5?

[bastetbabe27]

What frustrated you about the FZ5?

Well, shutter lag, startup times, noise at 'higher' ISOs, not being able to go higher than ISO 400, noise, slower shot to shot times than I'd like in certain situations, no manual focus, did I mention noise?

I'm not saying I hate the FZ5. It's an excellent P&S camera with a great lens. I've been really happy with the camera, and have gotten some great pictures out of it. And I will continue to use it. But from what I've been reading, it seems that the areas in which I want better performance require a dSLR. It would also serve me well for grad school, as one of the suggested skills is 'some expertise' in photography.

And I'm not going to rush out and buy an XTi on a whim just to have a new toy. B/c there are other things, like a new laptop, that I need to spend my money on now, this isn't probably going to happen until this coming summer. I just like to plan ahead. And dream....:)

-bastetbabe27

[24Peter]

Well they say love is blind for a reason, but let's not go there... ;) You would do well to search the forum for suggestions that have been made in the past for newbies looking for lenses but I'll make a couple of my own (BTW - I came from a Panasonic FZ20. Another great camera but also not without its frustrations.)

My suggestion is go with the kit lens and then get the 50 1.8 and the new Canon 70-300 IS. If you're really opposed to the kit lens, consider the new Tamron 17-50 2.8. If you're really opposed to using a flash, the consider the Canon 17-55 2.8 IS. (There are ways to use a flash w/out nuking people BTW.)

A 17-50-ish lens will cover your landscape and architectural shots, as well as group portraits. The 50 1.8 is nice for individual portraits or low light shots. The 70-300 can also be used as a portrait lens outdoors, as well as a fun, all around telephoto zoom in case you want to do more sports shooting.

I also love my Canon 28-105 3.5-4.5 USM as a middle zoom but it's not really an indoor/low light lens. You'd need to add light inside. Outdoors however, it's great.

Macro is a world unto itself. There are special lenses for this, as well as extension tubes (could be used with the 50 1.8) or diopter filters.

I would suggest avoiding one "all around" lens such as the 18-125/200 zooms for the time being. There are rumors however, that some new, high quality lenses in this range from both Canon and 3rd party manufacturers may be on the horizon, so by the time you're ready to buy your camera, the market for such a lens may have changed.

[bastetbabe27]

Well they say love is blind for a reason, but let's not go there... ;) You would do well to search the forum for suggestions that have been made in the past for newbies looking for lenses but I'll make a couple of my own

I have searched the forum, and read the lens buying guide, and feel hopelessly bewildered. There are so many opinions and choices...

As to my tentative choice of the XTi, it's not b/c it's the latest greatest thing, or that it has 10 MP (my FZ5 has 5, and it's been fine for my needs), or that I'm assuming higher $ = higher quality. I like how it feels, size-wise especially. The D80, while it is a great camera, is just too big for my hands. The XTi is on the big end of what I can hold comfortably, actually, and still reach the controls.

My suggestion is go with the kit lens and then get the 50 1.8 and the new Canon 70-300 IS. If you're really opposed to the kit lens, consider the new Tamron 17-50 2.8. If you're really opposed to using a flash, the consider the Canon 17-55 2.8 IS. (There are ways to use a flash w/out nuking people BTW.)

I was opposed to the kit lens simply b/c I had read that it wasn't very good quality. I don't have unlimited funds for this camera (though I haven't settled on a fixed budget it's definitely below $1500), so I figured it might be a better investment to save $100 by buying the body only and getting better lenses.

And I know there are ways to not 'nuke' people with flash, I really like the slow sync flash on the FZ5, it's just that starting out I don't want to also be getting into complicated lighting setups too...one thing at a time.

A 17-50-ish lens will cover your landscape and architectural shots, as well as group portraits. The 50 1.8 is nice for individual portraits or low light shots. The 70-300 can also be used as a portrait lens outdoors, as well as a fun, all around telephoto zoom in case you want to do more sports shooting.

That's also three lenses though. Is that justifiable for someone just starting out?

I also love my Canon 28-105 3.5-4.5 USM as a middle zoom but it's not really an indoor/low light lens. You'd need to add light inside. Outdoors however, it's great.

Well, that's why I was thinking the 50 1.8 for shooting indoors, and a moderate zoom for outdoors. Only prob would be inside large architectural spaces, like churches, which tend to be very dark in my experience.

I would suggest avoiding one "all around" lens such as the 18-125/200 zooms for the time being.

Why? Are they bad quality? Overpriced?

There are rumors however, that some new, high quality lenses in this range from both Canon and 3rd party manufacturers may be on the horizon, so by the time you're ready to buy your camera, the market for such a lens may have changed.

Of course! ;) There are always great new things around the corner...

-bastetbabe27

[24Peter]

I was opposed to the kit lens simply b/c I had read that it wasn't very good quality. I don't have unlimited funds for this camera (though I haven't settled on a fixed budget it's definitely below $1500), so I figured it might be a better investment to save $100 by buying the body only and getting better lenses.

There are as many different opinions about the kit lens as there are camera owners. I think it's worth the $100, esp. for someone just starting out.

And I know there are ways to not 'nuke' people with flash,

I was talking more about bouncing or diffusing the flash.

That's also three lenses though. Is that justifiable for someone just starting out?

RichNY - any opinion? ;)

Why? Are they bad quality? Overpriced?

Generally poor image quality.

Of course! ;) There are always great new things around the corner...

No, I wasn't being rhetorical. I think there are actually specific new "super zooms" in the works but I can't remember where I read that.