Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Clix Pix

macrumors Core
Since you already have a start with gear, my approach would be to just go out and use it. Time will tell you what you are missing and how often you are missing it. Your wallet, and perhaps your spouse, will control how (or not) you address that need.

For example those rare occasions where I wish I had a very wide angle lens, are often easily solved by splicing two or more images together on the computer. I seldom need the extra width both horizontally and vertically. That of course is just me and is at least partially tied to the fact that my go to camera is waterproof and shock resistant, and travels in my jacket or life vest pocket. The choices in this niche are incredibly limited, so I learn to make do.

I agree with this approach. When I made the switch in late 2019 to Sony, starting from scratch with camera body and lenses, I started out with two lenses I knew I'd use no matter what -- two macro lenses -- and a fast mid-tele. As time went on I then added lenses as the need arose. It didn't take long to realize that, yes, I really needed a long zoom lens, and so I acquired one. Later on, several months later, I purchased a slightly shorter long zoom because I wanted something easier to handhold and carry on walks, and I'd found that the 200-600mm (the Bazooka) was just a bit too awkward and heavy to handle. For me, a slightly-built, petite and not exactly young woman, it's much more suited to using on the tripod with a gimbal.

Along the way, too, I wanted a couple more fast lenses and purchased an f/1.8 35mm and an f/1.8 85mm lens as well. I still need a lens wider than the 35mm and one of these days I'll finally get to actually buying it, but so far in my shooting I've managed without one, although there have been times when I've thought, "I've got to get a wide angle lens!" Basically, though, my lenses reflect the kind of shooting I do, so that each has its role in my photographic repertoire, although of course some lenses still see much more activity than others (that 90mm macro and the 100-400mm zoom have spent the most time on the camera to date).

And, yes, the best way to learn and determine what you really need (or would like) in the way of lenses is to shoot with what you already have.....
 

kallisti

macrumors 68000
Apr 22, 2003
1,751
6,670
Photography can rapidly devolve into an “If only...” category regarding gear. “If only” I had this body. “If only” I had this lens. The widely used expression for this is GAS (gear acquisition syndrome).

It can become an obsession/addiction.

It’s normal to want to place blame for “bad” photos on gear. It’s not me as a photographer, it’s that I’m not using the best gear.

So you maybe make a body upgrade because the marketing materials make the latest body seem so much better than your current body. But no, your photos really aren’t any better.

So you do some research and come to the realization that it’s really all about lenses and not bodies. You do your due diligence and buy a “good” lens based on reviews.

Still your photos aren’t “good”.

Maybe you didn’t buy the “best” body and that’s the problem? Maybe you didn’t buy the “best” lens?

Easy, normal, and natural human behavior to want to blame mediocre results on gear. “I must need to just spend more money” or “I can’t afford to spend more money so I just have to accept that I’ll never be a *real* photographer”.

While this is a normal thought process, it is totally and completely untrue!

Compelling photos are the result of good subject choice, good composition, and good light. Sometimes gear can make a photo “more perfect” if subject, composition, and light are optimal. Sometimes gear can add creative options that wouldn’t be possible with “lesser” gear.

But the most basic and fundamentally important aspects to a successful photo are subject choice, composition, and light. Nail those and the gear used becomes less important. Don’t nail those, and the gear used becomes less important, but for different reasons...

When starting out, you will get far more bang for your buck by spending time learning the basics of composition. Specifically learning to see the whole frame and moving yourself or the camera to exclude distracting elements.

Fine to think about new lenses, but my personal rule when contemplating new gear is:

What problem does this new gear fix/solve that my current gear doesn’t address? Not a question of do I want something, but an honest question of how will this new gear let me do something that my current gear won’t and how important is this new something to what I want to shoot/create?
 

deep diver

macrumors 68030
Jan 17, 2008
2,711
4,521
Philadelphia.
Photography can rapidly devolve into an “If only...” category regarding gear. “If only” I had this body. “If only” I had this lens. The widely used expression for this is GAS (gear acquisition syndrome).

It can become an obsession/addiction.

It’s normal to want to place blame for “bad” photos on gear. It’s not me as a photographer, it’s that I’m not using the best gear.

So you maybe make a body upgrade because the marketing materials make the latest body seem so much better than your current body. But no, your photos really aren’t any better.

So you do some research and come to the realization that it’s really all about lenses and not bodies. You do your due diligence and buy a “good” lens based on reviews.

Still your photos aren’t “good”.

Maybe you didn’t buy the “best” body and that’s the problem? Maybe you didn’t buy the “best” lens?

Easy, normal, and natural human behavior to want to blame mediocre results on gear. “I must need to just spend more money” or “I can’t afford to spend more money so I just have to accept that I’ll never be a *real* photographer”.

While this is a normal thought process, it is totally and completely untrue!

Compelling photos are the result of good subject choice, good composition, and good light. Sometimes gear can make a photo “more perfect” if subject, composition, and light are optimal. Sometimes gear can add creative options that wouldn’t be possible with “lesser” gear.

But the most basic and fundamentally important aspects to a successful photo are subject choice, composition, and light. Nail those and the gear used becomes less important. Don’t nail those, and the gear used becomes less important, but for different reasons...

When starting out, you will get far more bang for your buck by spending time learning the basics of composition. Specifically learning to see the whole frame and moving yourself or the camera to exclude distracting elements.

Fine to think about new lenses, but my personal rule when contemplating new gear is:

What problem does this new gear fix/solve that my current gear doesn’t address? Not a question of do I want something, but an honest question of how will this new gear let me do something that my current gear won’t and how important is this new something to what I want to shoot/create?

I completely agree. Some of my best images were shot with my D50 and the kit lens (including one that got me the dreaded 1st place in the Weekly Contest.)
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Ish and AlaskaMoose

Buck987

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jan 16, 2010
1,268
2,106
Photography can rapidly devolve into an “If only...” category regarding gear. “If only” I had this body. “If only” I had this lens. The widely used expression for this is GAS (gear acquisition syndrome).

It can become an obsession/addiction.

It’s normal to want to place blame for “bad” photos on gear. It’s not me as a photographer, it’s that I’m not using the best gear.

So you maybe make a body upgrade because the marketing materials make the latest body seem so much better than your current body. But no, your photos really aren’t any better.

So you do some research and come to the realization that it’s really all about lenses and not bodies. You do your due diligence and buy a “good” lens based on reviews.

Still your photos aren’t “good”.

Maybe you didn’t buy the “best” body and that’s the problem? Maybe you didn’t buy the “best” lens?

Easy, normal, and natural human behavior to want to blame mediocre results on gear. “I must need to just spend more money” or “I can’t afford to spend more money so I just have to accept that I’ll never be a *real* photographer”.

While this is a normal thought process, it is totally and completely untrue!

Compelling photos are the result of good subject choice, good composition, and good light. Sometimes gear can make a photo “more perfect” if subject, composition, and light are optimal. Sometimes gear can add creative options that wouldn’t be possible with “lesser” gear.

But the most basic and fundamentally important aspects to a successful photo are subject choice, composition, and light. Nail those and the gear used becomes less important. Don’t nail those, and the gear used becomes less important, but for different reasons...

When starting out, you will get far more bang for your buck by spending time learning the basics of composition. Specifically learning to see the whole frame and moving yourself or the camera to exclude distracting elements.

Fine to think about new lenses, but my personal rule when contemplating new gear is:

What problem does this new gear fix/solve that my current gear doesn’t address? Not a question of do I want something, but an honest question of how will this new gear let me do something that my current gear won’t and how important is this new something to what I want to shoot/create?
I can relate to this...good advice and I agree. In cycling we say it's not the bike its the engine. thanks
 

AlaskaMoose

macrumors 68040
Apr 26, 2008
3,586
13,430
Alaska
I completely agree. Some of my best images were shot with my D50 and the kit lens (including one that got me the dreaded 1st place in the Weekly Contest.)
I can agree with that.
My best photos happen to be, not because technique nor camera being used at the moment, but because I happened to be at the right place and time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buck987

Expos of 1969

Contributor
Aug 25, 2013
4,821
9,508
Photography can rapidly devolve into an “If only...” category regarding gear. “If only” I had this body. “If only” I had this lens. The widely used expression for this is GAS (gear acquisition syndrome).

It can become an obsession/addiction.

It’s normal to want to place blame for “bad” photos on gear. It’s not me as a photographer, it’s that I’m not using the best gear.

So you maybe make a body upgrade because the marketing materials make the latest body seem so much better than your current body. But no, your photos really aren’t any better.

So you do some research and come to the realization that it’s really all about lenses and not bodies. You do your due diligence and buy a “good” lens based on reviews.

Still your photos aren’t “good”.

Maybe you didn’t buy the “best” body and that’s the problem? Maybe you didn’t buy the “best” lens?

Easy, normal, and natural human behavior to want to blame mediocre results on gear. “I must need to just spend more money” or “I can’t afford to spend more money so I just have to accept that I’ll never be a *real* photographer”.

While this is a normal thought process, it is totally and completely untrue!

Compelling photos are the result of good subject choice, good composition, and good light. Sometimes gear can make a photo “more perfect” if subject, composition, and light are optimal. Sometimes gear can add creative options that wouldn’t be possible with “lesser” gear.

But the most basic and fundamentally important aspects to a successful photo are subject choice, composition, and light. Nail those and the gear used becomes less important. Don’t nail those, and the gear used becomes less important, but for different reasons...

When starting out, you will get far more bang for your buck by spending time learning the basics of composition. Specifically learning to see the whole frame and moving yourself or the camera to exclude distracting elements.

Fine to think about new lenses, but my personal rule when contemplating new gear is:

What problem does this new gear fix/solve that my current gear doesn’t address? Not a question of do I want something, but an honest question of how will this new gear let me do something that my current gear won’t and how important is this new something to what I want to shoot/create?
Well stated. Yesterday I went to an exhibition of Vivian Maier photos. As some will be aware, she worked for 40 years as a governess and took photos (mostly street photos in New York and Chicago in the 1950's) as a hobby. Fixed lens cameras were her tool. Not all will like her style, but have a look to see what can be accomplished with basic tools and an eye for the human condition.
 

kallisti

macrumors 68000
Apr 22, 2003
1,751
6,670
Well stated. Yesterday I went to an exhibition of Vivian Maier photos. As some will be aware, she worked for 40 years as a governess and took photos (mostly street photos in New York and Chicago in the 1950's) as a hobby. Fixed lens cameras were her tool. Not all will like her style, but have a look to see what can be accomplished with basic tools and an eye for the human condition.
I have a book of her work, but haven’t viewed any in person. If memory serves, boxes of negatives were found in an attic after her death. I find many of her images compelling.
 

Ish

macrumors 68020
Nov 30, 2004
2,241
795
UK
It depends on what you like to shoot, but I had only a 50mm (full frame) lens for the first few years of my photography and made it work for anything I wanted to do. Nowadays, I have Fuji APSC cameras and my favourites are 23mm/35mm/50mm. I'd be loath to give any of these three up.
 

Dockland

macrumors 6502a
Feb 26, 2021
968
8,944
Sweden
For a beginner, I'd say any APS-C or FF that you find affordable, used ones is a great start. Kit lens will do and perhaps a "nifty fifty" to try out for the "Prime feeling"

I started shooting back in 1987 and went with what I could afford. Nothing fancy, I've seen images taken with old, cheap gear that is artistically "better" than other taken with "high end" gear. If you have the feel and eye for photography the gear isn't prio 1.

Nowadays I buy the latest and perhaps not the greatest, but that's only if images turn out like cr*p, I can't blame the gear :)

..and lenses. I can't state this enough. Good or great lenses is way way better than the best camera body I'd say. If You want to upgrade the image quality, in 8/10 it's a new/faster/sharper lens that will do the trick.

E: forgot my must have lenses of choice. Wide 15-* f/2.8, my 100mm macro and the 70-200 f/2.8 (but got the RF 100-500 so it's possible that one is replacing the 70-200. Time will tell :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buck987

AlaskaMoose

macrumors 68040
Apr 26, 2008
3,586
13,430
Alaska
For a beginner, I'd say any APS-C or FF that you find affordable, used ones is a great start. Kit lens will do and perhaps a "nifty fifty" to try out for the "Prime feeling"

I started shooting back in 1987 and went with what I could afford. Nothing fancy, I've seen images taken with old, cheap gear that is artistically "better" than other taken with "high end" gear. If you have the feel and eye for photography the gear isn't prio 1.

Nowadays I buy the latest and perhaps not the greatest, but that's only if images turn out like cr*p, I can't blame the gear :)

..and lenses. I can't state this enough. Good or great lenses is way way better than the best camera body I'd say. If You want to upgrade the image quality, in 8/10 it's a new/faster/sharper lens that will do the trick.

E: forgot my must have lenses of choice. Wide 15-* f/2.8, my 100mm macro and the 70-200 f/2.8 (but got the RF 100-500 so it's possible that one is replacing the 70-200. Time will tell :)
I have the EF 70-200 f/4 L (no IS on this lens), and I am keeping it. The only zoom lenses I have are this one, and the RF 100-500, plus a Tokina SWA 16-28mm. The rest are primes, all EF's but none have IS (100mm f/2.8 macro, 135mm f/2 L, 200mm f.2.8 L, and 400mm f/5.6 L).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dockland

ssmed

macrumors 6502a
Sep 28, 2009
885
423
UK
I don't think you need to go much wider, so unless you want to upgrade the do everything lens e.g. an internally focusing 24-70 f2.8 FX VR I would get something much longer (200-300 mm).

I think this is problematic question though. Will you stay with Nikon DX or move to the Z system eventually or possibly stay old-fashioned and upgrade to a FX body. Laying out a big wad of money to change it later might be regretted.

Sometimes it is worth just looking through Lightroom or whatever you use and seeing at what focal length you like to shoot. It is pointless buying something you won't use.
 

Lee_Bo

Cancelled
Mar 26, 2017
606
878
As a landscape / wildlife photographer, I have the Tamron 18-400 and the 150-600. These are pretty much the only lenses I use, both on Canon cameras.

Rather than suggest a starter lens, I’d suggest getting familiar with the camera itself and all the features it has with the lenses you already have. Once you do that, then think about what you want to photograph.

Another idea is to rent different lenses. I personally use lensrentals.com. That way you can try different lenses without the expense of buying something you’ll never use.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buck987

AlaskaMoose

macrumors 68040
Apr 26, 2008
3,586
13,430
Alaska
As a landscape / wildlife photographer, I have the Tamron 18-400 and the 150-600. These are pretty much the only lenses I use, both on Canon cameras.

Rather than suggest a starter lens, I’d suggest getting familiar with the camera itself and all the features it has with the lenses you already have. Once you do that, then think about what you want to photograph.

Another idea is to rent different lenses. I personally use lensrentals.com. That way you can try different lenses without the expense of buying something you’ll never use.
Renting lenses is quite a good idea.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buck987

Clix Pix

macrumors Core
It's an excellent idea! Actually, for quite a while now I've been waffling about buying a particular wide-angle lens but somehow have kept pushing it off, pushing it off, instead along the way buying another lens or two.... For me, shooting wide-angle is venturing into different territory than where I usually hang out. I think it would probably be a very good good idea for me to just go ahead and rent the lens I have in mind, keep it for whatever the standard rental period is, really see how much I'd actually use it and under what circumstances. I think I'd know pretty quickly whether or not I would love it and that the two of us would make wonderful images together in the future. That could save me a lot of money and time, setting a specific time frame for me to use the thing, getting me actually out there shooting with the lens in question so that I actually could make up my mind one way or another rather than this silly on-and-off playing games with myself that has been going on way too long.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buck987

ConfusedPear

macrumors newbie
Sep 28, 2020
16
12
I understand lenses and their selection depend on the type of photography you shoot.

However what would you suggest be the first "good glass" lens a new photographer should invest in? ( I have a 14-140mm F/3.5-5.6 and a 35MMF/1.8 lens and a kit lens that is 17-55mm. F/3.5-5.5)

And....

Is there one lens you cannot do without on your camera?

Hi! Maybe I'm a little late but do you intend to stick with Nikon DSLR for a long time? As many photographers may agree, glass stays, bodies change. And in that regard, perhaps in 2/3 years, you want a newer Nikon model (or other brand), adjusted to your personal use. And, by the way market is moving, you may get a mirrorless body. So your current DSLR glass will not be fully compatible.

I'm just trying to make this exercise so you can avoid the hassle of gathering gear and then selling it later.

I began my photography journey in 2014 with a Nikon D3300, used the kit lens for a long time and then bought a 35mm 1.8 lens - never left the camera body from that day. Nowadays I'm using a Sony A7RIII with a 24-105 f4 and a Samyang 14mm. But the 24-105 is used 95% of the times.

I have a friend, who was an experienced Nikon user, with a D7200 and a D810, with a lot of expensive glass, and after doing a job for NatGeo is now selling all his Nikon gear to buy a Canon R5 - he just loved using it for the kind of photo he does.

TL;DR - like you said, it really depends on your photography. You have a nice array of lenses to experiment with. Give it some time, understand what you really love to shoot and then you're ready to safely invest in a good glass. Most of the good photos depends on being there at the right moment, knowing how to correctly capture it.

That's my take!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buck987

adrianlondon

macrumors 603
Nov 28, 2013
5,536
8,360
Switzerland
My first SLR (non-digital, so full frame) was body only, and I bought the Canon 50mm f1.4 to go with it.

Loved it, taught me a lot, but I like to take photos indoors in low light, so wanted a fast wide angle.

Started looking at very expensive lenses. Gave up and bought my first ever digital camera (Canon PowerShot S30). Had all the same manual controls as my SLR so no learning curve. Enjoyed it, but it wasn't that good in low light.

Went back to SLR (digital this time, Canon 40D). APS-C little sensor made any lens more "zoomy", whereas I wanted the opposite. Loved taking photos with the camera. Came with a useful 17-85mm zoom lens but a slow f4-5.6. Had Canon 5D camera envy. My friend had one. Again looked at fast wide lenses. Gave up.

Sold it (somehow for more than I paid) and bought another PowerShot (the S95). Not bad low light. Recently gave up with cameras and now just use my iPhone 11, which uses software trickery to make a crap little lens perform ok.

Reasons for the last decision? My photos are usually taken when out hiking or cycling (mainly in Asia, pre pandemic), or indoors in museums etc. I like the fact the phone backs up to the cloud as I take photos, in case it's stolen or I drop it or lose it. Was always worried that I'd get a corrupt memory card in my camera, or would drop it taking a photo while cycling and it'd smash.

Back to the original question:

Full frame? 50mm F-as-low-as-you-can-justify. Probably f1.4.
APS-C? 35mm.

And it seems that's what you have already! So you're done. Enjoy taking photos and learning what lens you'd like to invest in yourself, after discovering where your passion lies. It's quite personal from now on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buck987

Karnicopia

macrumors 6502
Mar 27, 2015
483
507
I shoot Fuji so I think 16 mm was the first expensive one I picked up then 50-140 f1.8 then I think I went macro with the 80 mm and then I went with fish eye 8-16 then finally wide zoom 16-55 f1.8. I haven’t picked up a lens in a while and think I’m pretty well covered with these.

Not sure that is my advice for a beginner but I’d do it the same way because I love wide angle shooting. The wide zoom is great if I have no idea what I’m going to shoot and then I may just bring that but I really still prefer the 16 and 50-140 in a bag or I like 16 and 80 macro at the botanic gardens as that is usually enough variety to get me by. Sunrise sunset or city shots I really just need the fisheye zoom and love that lens for what it does even if it isn’t all that versatile.
 

adrianlondon

macrumors 603
Nov 28, 2013
5,536
8,360
Switzerland
Your feet are the best lens you'll ever have.
it's not always possible to walk closer to something. Plus it helps with distortion. But yes, I remember reading somewhere "zoom with your feet!".

Screenshot 2021-05-12 at 10.26.42 CEST.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: delsoul
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.