Are the 50mm f/1.8 and 75-300mm zoom good lens choices beyond the kit lens for a Rebel T1i?

Question

I own a Canon Rebel T1i with a EFS 18-55mm image-stabilizer lens. Since I want to learn more about photography, my husband purchased for me a EF 50mm and a EF 75-300mm zoom.

I am wondering if these lenses are a good choice. The 50 mm seems a overkill since I have the 18-55mm, and I've heard the 75-300mm is not the best option.

Can you please advise? I will not be doing professional photography; I will be taking photos of my baby, traveling sites, nature, etc.

Answer 1

I think you've got a pretty nice setup now. The 18-55 is good for landscapes (wide-angle), the 50mm is perfect for portraits of your baby and the telephoto is great for pictures of your baby in the park walking on the beach etc as well as other close up shots where a telephoto is needed. If you find you enjoy taking macro shots (flowers, insects, etc) you can pick up a macro lens but you can take really nice photos of flowers and such even with the 50mm and the telephoto. Get a tripod and a few filters and you can experiment with long exposure and HDR or just take group pictures with yourself in it...

You can get much better quality professional glass (for a lot more $) but there is no need unless you are not satisfied with the image quality you are getting.

Answer 2

• The 50/1.8 is more than three full f-stops faster than your 18-55 (which at 55mm is an f/5.6 lens), which means it can gather 8 times more light than the 18-55 will. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-number
• Having the faster aperture also allows for more creativity with a narrower depth of field
• It's the ideal focal-length on an EF-S camera for portraits (80mm is the traditional "portrait lens" length; it's considered the most flattering, perspective-wise.)
• There are fewer elements (pieces of glass) which sometimes makes for a sharper image
• It has very little barrel distortion
• It's a very inexpensive lens, making it excellent value

The 50/1.8 is what you toss on your camera when you're at someone's backyard BBQ in the late afternoon, for example. In order to get the utility of the 50/1.8 in a zoom, you have to spend nearly $1500 for the 17-55 2.8/IS (which is an amazing lens, and it should be, for the price. It's also big and heavy.)

There's more than one 75-300 (and a few similar lenses), and it comes in both image-stabilized and non-image-stabilized versions. However, unless you plan on making enormous prints, nobody (including you) is going to be able to tell the difference between any of Canon's modern telephoto zooms, so image quality shouldn't be a great concern or cause much buyer's regret. If you plan on using the telephoto lens in bright conditions, don't lust much after the image-stabilized version; just make sure you're using a fast enough shutter speed. Exposure time should be 1/(focal length) or faster; experiment, as some people have steadier hands than others.

I would recommend purchasing a small tripod such as one of the Gorillapods, a circular-polarizing filter for the 18-55 to start with, etc.

Answer 3

I think the 50mm is a GREAT choice for you. It will allow you much more creativity with its large aperture, than the kit lens ever will. Seriously, ditch the kit lens and keep the 50 on there all the time.

As for the 75-300, I regret, I owned this lens (the non-IS version). I found it to be terrible. You may have gotten the IS version, which may well be better, but the non IS one is an awful lens. I would consider returning it.

I'm not sure what you mean by "travelling sites" but for nature do you mean landscapes, or up-close flowers and insects? If landscapes - you may wish to go for a wide-angle. I hear great things about the EF-S 10-22. For the up-close you may wish to go for a Macro lens. The EF-S 60mm f/2.8 or the EF 100mm f/2L IS USM is an excellent choice. (There is also a cheaper non-IS version of the 100mm a f/2.8 version).

Hope that helps?

Answer 4

My only suggestion would be to pick up the 50mm 1.4 USM instead of the 1.8 if you have the budget for it. It has much faster AF that is quiet and the lens doesn't feel like it will break off into pieces in your hand. The 1.4 also has simliar image quality to the pro 50mm 1.2

Answer 5

The 50mm 1.8 (aka nifty fifty) is a superb lens for the money. Sure it is inexpensive so is made of cheaper materials that make it feel a little bit toy-like but the sharpness and quality of the photographs it can produce are very good, especially when compared to the kit 18-55 kit lens.

The 50mm 1.8 is a prime lens and generally speaking the quality of images produced by prime lenses is higher than that of zoom lenses, especially at the lower price point. The 50mm 1.8 will be far superior to the 50mm focal range of the 18-55 kit lens.

I spent about a year shooting with the nifty fifty almost exclusively and I think it is a really valuable tool with regard to improving your photography. I would recommend this approach to anyone interested in improving their technique.

I would agree with the comment posted in this thread that the 1.4 version is a better lens but it is also approximately three times the price and there is absolutely nothing wrong with the 1.8, especially if you are just starting out. The wide aperture will give you far more creative control and you will be extremely pleased with the results. It's a lot of fun.

I owned a Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM a few years ago which was a very reasonable lens for the price. Unfortunately from everything I have heard the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM is generally considered to be a very poor lens, although I should make it clear that I have not used one personally.