good started lens for dslr newbie like me

[aducksredass]

After 6 months of careful consideration I recently purchased a Olympus E-510 with the 14-42mm kit lens. So far this camera is exceeding my expectations in every way. I have also heard that the camera can be awesome, but if you are not using some good glass, you will never be able to use your dslr to its full potential.

My two questions are as follows:

1. Is this true?
2. Are the kits lenses really that much different from the non kit lenses?
3. What would be a good started lens for a newbie like me.


I am mainly looking for a lens that will allow me to get some great shots while backpacking this upcoming spring, summer, and fall. Here is what I was looking at, OLYMPUS ED 70-300MM F4-5.6 LENS 4/3

[griptape]

Your body is just that; a body. Just a sensor mounted inside a chassis with buttons that control how the sensor acts. All the sensor can capture is what it sees through the lens. Good glass is expensive, and it's expensive for a reason. If it wasn't worth the price, no one would buy it, and no one would manufacture it if there was no one buying it. The lens is what actually sees the image, the sensor just captures what the lens is seeing.

What's your budget?

[aducksredass]

I am only trying to spend $300-$600 and I really just want something that would be killer for outdoor & night photos in the wilderness.

[kgosden]

The Olympus kit lenses are widely considered to be among the best kit lenses. They are good performers. The ED 70-300MM F4-5.6 is not going to be a good choice for night photos. There is going to be nothing cheap for that and certainly nothing that you will likely be able to use for night action shots. Even for daytime wildlife you really need something that will is faster than F5.6 at the long end.

[aducksredass]

well, what would you recommend as the most reasonable priced lens for what I am trying to do, f5.6+?

[Rooz]

the lower the f-stop the "faster" the glass. so to put it simply, a lens with a lower number that f5.6. (not 5.6+)

[aducksredass]

Got it! Thanks for all of you guys help. I will let you know what I decide.

thanks,
Justin

[kgosden]

It is tough to make a lens recommendation without more details on what and how you want to photograph. I assume that this is your first SLR (film or digital). I would honestly suggest that you spend a few months with the kit lenses, as I said they are really very good. Then you will have a better idea as to what you are missing. The two best lenses for the money in the Olympus lineup are probably the 11-22 and the 50mm macro. Both will run you $400-700. I have not looked into the new releases.

The Sigma 50-500 f4-6.3 is well thought of for bird photos. Sure it is a bit slow, but the $999 price is excellent for the reach it offers. For larger subjects the Olympus 50-200 f2.8-3.5 is a good lens and the new version is a super fast focusing lens a big plus in wildlife. It is fast enough that you could add one of the Olympus teleconverters to extend the reach (at a lose of one or two f-stops). This could keep your total carrying weight down a bit.

[aducksredass]

After you educated me I went ahead and looked up a couple of lenses. The 50-200 f2.8-3.5 is actually the one that I was looking at.

I don't plan on buying another lens till late spring, I just wanted to get some input from people who have more experience than me with out having to go to Ritz and ask them questions that they can't answer half the time any ways.


Thanks for all the help AND education.

[WestCoast]

Even for daytime wildlife you really need something that will is faster than F5.6 at the long end.

That hasn't been my experience, as I get very good daytime photos with my lens at f/5.6. That said, you'll need faster glass to get MOVING wildlife without significant blur.