Well,there is probably no "cut-and-dried" answer, but I'll give it a stab. For point-and-shoot cameras, the lens is fixed in the camera's body. So, depending on the camera you buy, you are stuck with the lens that comes with it. One of your criteria for a point-and-shoot may be the zoom range in focal length of the lens. To some people it is important to have a long reaching focal length (for shooting sports or wildlife, including birds, for example), while normal to short telephoto focal lengths are important to others who others want to shoot portraits.
For DSLRs, you will have to get lenses made by the manufacturer of your camera, or from some third party manufacturers who make lenses for your make of camera (the type of camera mount that fits a lens). Again, a good starter lens is one that fits your needs. But in general, and I'd say most probably for beginning photographers, a zoom lens fits more needs than a prime (single focal length) lens. Perhaps the most general purpose lens for a DSLR is a zoom lens that covers focal lengths from somewhat wide angle (24-28 mm) to short telephoto (90-120 mm).
You're right, Kevin, a zoom lens is probably the best thing for most beginners. Buuut, if you want to do something different, if you want to challenge yourself and really cultivate your composition skills, try a "normal" lens (50 mm on full-frame, 35-ish mm on most consumer DSLRs). Carry only that lens with you for a year or so, and you will not only learn what other lenses you need, but you'll learn so much about creative composition! This normal lens will give your images a very real, journalistic quality, though, so if you're not a fan of that look, ignore everything I just said.
Becky - it's hard to answer a question like that without knowing the person and what they're interested in.
But I agree. I think the zoom lens has spoiled a lot of new photographers. I did exactly what you talked about. I used one lens on a used Canonet (you couldn't remove the lens anyway) for a full year.
And yes, it is a great way to learn photography.
It was many years before I bought a zoom lens, and at that point I knew why I needed it.
The normal fast lens for a Canon full frame is the f1.4 50mm. It is a relatively inexpensive lens, and it is f1.4.
Does a beginning photographer know what an F1.4 can do for them? Or the difference between walking around with a large zoom, versus a small normal lens in terms of how people react to them?
Anyway - I just wanted to put my 2 cents in for non-zoom, and for that matter, relatively simple camera although those are hard to find for the beginning photographer in the digital world.
Another approach is to find a photographer that you admire and see if you can find out what they're shooting with at the moment. I remember doing this many years ago with Cartier Bresson in terms of which lenses he used. I couldn't afford that Leica setup at the time, but it gave me a good starting point in terms of what lenses he was using.
The versatility of a 10-24mm or a 70-200mm lens is ideal for many situations.
And I doubt most people could afford lenses with all the focal lengths that these two zooms (or a 70-300mm or a 100-400mm zoom) cover.
A 50mm lens is interesting but you cannot get very dramatic perspective with it. (And it's a short telephoto with a DSLR with a sensor smaller than 24x36mm). I love the look you get with an ultra wide OR a 300 to 400mm focal length in a zoom such as a 70-300mm or 80-400mm.
Granted, some zooms are cheap and don't produce superb image quality but the better models certainly do! Regardless of the brand.
Except for a Macro lens, I no longer own any single focal length lenses. I'm not knocking them at all; someone who often shoots with a 14mm or 300mm focal length might want to buy a lens like that.
Others, like me, who want greater versatility, will stick with zooms.
I bought my Nikon D90 with the 18-105 kit lens. It has a plastic mount and no focus or DOF markings on the barrel, but is otherwise a pretty competent lens.
For wide angle I have a Sigma 10-20mm which I use for landscape and sometimes interiors
For telephoto reach I have the Nikon 70-300mm VR zoom.
These three lenses cover the 35mm equivalent focal length range of 15 to 450mm which covers just about any situation. Although these are Nikon lenses Canon and other manufacturers offer similar products.
That's for APS-C. I don't have any Full frame or 4/3 cameras or lenses - so won't comment. (OK the 70-300 is a full frame lens - so uses the sweet spot on APS-C)
None of these zooms is particularly fast, but I find i don't need fast apertures at the wide angle end. I usually can't use fast appertures with the telephoto because I am usually in need of as much DOF as I can muster. A faster optic would focus better in low light but fast telephoto lenses are both costly and heavy.
I also own a 50mm f1.8 which provides the ability to separate subject from background using faster apertures, and is not a bad portrait lens.
I don't yet have a dedicated macro lens (I have my eye on the Sigma 150mm Macro). I currently use Kenko extension tubes with the 50mm or 70-300mm for macro.
Well, everyone has an opinion here of course - one of the best questions there is!
My answer to the initial question "What are good starter lenses for a beginner?" is really the highest quality lens the beginner can afford. Quality glass trumps everything if you ask me.
When I started out with digital, I was frustrated by not getting enough "keepers" because when I saw them full screen they were out of focus. When I finally got the 24-105 L from Canon, it was like a whole new world opened up and my passion came thru because I wasn't frustrated by as many focus issues.
Tho I will agree with those who say the beginner should probably have one or two primes, it is easy to get absorbed in a high quality zoom as well.
I say get the cheapest body and the most expensive lens you can afford. The glass is (in my humble opinion) more important than buying a body that is top of the line.
I agree, Mitch re: your comment on high grade lenses.
And the one good thing is that a 50mm lens can be excellent while not being expensive.
Of course, having tested some really fabulous 16 megapixel and higher resolution DSLRs, I am not sure I agree about getting the cheapest camera. With film that was probably true but not with digital.
Fujifilm's X-Pro1, now M Mount friendly
Olympus' Micro Four Thirds 75mm prime
Can you fix the focus on a blurry photo after the fact?
The birth of Mirrorless Cameras
The Joy Of Winning A Photo Contest
Choosing your first dSLR camera
New York City can be beautiful!
Choosing the Right Light Stand
Photojojo iPhone Telephoto Lens review — AudioCast
How To Buy Digital Photo Frames For An Exhibit - Part 2
Hey MAC users! A great source and an April Fool that is no joke
My week with Q
How To Become A Successful Photographer
"When the Wind Stopped" — poem with 4 photos
Creating The New Family Portrait
Tips for Textures 
Cast aways - saving those photographic memories
One Man Show: My 25 Years With Digital Photography
Studio, Flash, & Available Light — Three Books Reviewed
Portrait styling: dangerous pairings
Adobe Photoshop CS6 Product Managers Interview Audiocast
A gift of flowers: unfold your senses
On Set of "Love & Robots" the Film
No-Brainer Setup For A Digital Photo Frame Exhibit - Part 3
Exhibiting With Digital Photo Frames (DPF) Part 1
San Diego 7 photo gallery — Just Be Love All Stay Cool
Planning “National Geographic” style photo travel
Find Inner Peace and Beauty at San Jose, California, Airport
Wilderness Travel 1 Rainforests – Essential Gear
Backlighting Basics
What Moves You?
FIGURES IN MOTION: Decades of Evolving Personal Imagery in Photography, Part 7
Lomography Store, Austin, Texas — GALLERY
GALLERY — Up to $1,000 Reward for Cattle Rustlers
25% off on photography eBooks
eyePhone: The eBook for iPhone Photographers
Interview with Harold Davis — Closeup Maestro of Flowers & Water Drops
Interview with Steve Caplin — Photoshop Digital Artist, Commercial Illustrator, & Author
A Brief History Of Light & Photography: Part 3 of 3
A Brief History Of Light & Photography: Part 2 Of 3
Easy technique to select, edit and sequence keywords for web
How much should you charge for a photograph?
Comments
Well,there is probably no "cut-and-dried" answer, but I'll give it a stab. For point-and-shoot cameras, the lens is fixed in the camera's body. So, depending on the camera you buy, you are stuck with the lens that comes with it. One of your criteria for a point-and-shoot may be the zoom range in focal length of the lens. To some people it is important to have a long reaching focal length (for shooting sports or wildlife, including birds, for example), while normal to short telephoto focal lengths are important to others who others want to shoot portraits.
For DSLRs, you will have to get lenses made by the manufacturer of your camera, or from some third party manufacturers who make lenses for your make of camera (the type of camera mount that fits a lens). Again, a good starter lens is one that fits your needs. But in general, and I'd say most probably for beginning photographers, a zoom lens fits more needs than a prime (single focal length) lens. Perhaps the most general purpose lens for a DSLR is a zoom lens that covers focal lengths from somewhat wide angle (24-28 mm) to short telephoto (90-120 mm).
You're right, Kevin, a zoom lens is probably the best thing for most beginners. Buuut, if you want to do something different, if you want to challenge yourself and really cultivate your composition skills, try a "normal" lens (50 mm on full-frame, 35-ish mm on most consumer DSLRs). Carry only that lens with you for a year or so, and you will not only learn what other lenses you need, but you'll learn so much about creative composition! This normal lens will give your images a very real, journalistic quality, though, so if you're not a fan of that look, ignore everything I just said.
Becky - it's hard to answer a question like that without knowing the person and what they're interested in.
But I agree. I think the zoom lens has spoiled a lot of new photographers. I did exactly what you talked about. I used one lens on a used Canonet (you couldn't remove the lens anyway) for a full year.
And yes, it is a great way to learn photography.
It was many years before I bought a zoom lens, and at that point I knew why I needed it.
The normal fast lens for a Canon full frame is the f1.4 50mm. It is a relatively inexpensive lens, and it is f1.4.
Does a beginning photographer know what an F1.4 can do for them? Or the difference between walking around with a large zoom, versus a small normal lens in terms of how people react to them?
Anyway - I just wanted to put my 2 cents in for non-zoom, and for that matter, relatively simple camera although those are hard to find for the beginning photographer in the digital world.
Another approach is to find a photographer that you admire and see if you can find out what they're shooting with at the moment. I remember doing this many years ago with Cartier Bresson in terms of which lenses he used. I couldn't afford that Leica setup at the time, but it gave me a good starting point in terms of what lenses he was using.
Well, I'm going to espouse zoom lenses.
The versatility of a 10-24mm or a 70-200mm lens is ideal for many situations.
And I doubt most people could afford lenses with all the focal lengths that these two zooms (or a 70-300mm or a 100-400mm zoom) cover.
A 50mm lens is interesting but you cannot get very dramatic perspective with it. (And it's a short telephoto with a DSLR with a sensor smaller than 24x36mm). I love the look you get with an ultra wide OR a 300 to 400mm focal length in a zoom such as a 70-300mm or 80-400mm.
Granted, some zooms are cheap and don't produce superb image quality but the better models certainly do! Regardless of the brand.
Except for a Macro lens, I no longer own any single focal length lenses. I'm not knocking them at all; someone who often shoots with a 14mm or 300mm focal length might want to buy a lens like that.
Others, like me, who want greater versatility, will stick with zooms.
I bought my Nikon D90 with the 18-105 kit lens. It has a plastic mount and no focus or DOF markings on the barrel, but is otherwise a pretty competent lens.
For wide angle I have a Sigma 10-20mm which I use for landscape and sometimes interiors
For telephoto reach I have the Nikon 70-300mm VR zoom.
These three lenses cover the 35mm equivalent focal length range of 15 to 450mm which covers just about any situation. Although these are Nikon lenses Canon and other manufacturers offer similar products.
That's for APS-C. I don't have any Full frame or 4/3 cameras or lenses - so won't comment. (OK the 70-300 is a full frame lens - so uses the sweet spot on APS-C)
None of these zooms is particularly fast, but I find i don't need fast apertures at the wide angle end. I usually can't use fast appertures with the telephoto because I am usually in need of as much DOF as I can muster. A faster optic would focus better in low light but fast telephoto lenses are both costly and heavy.
I also own a 50mm f1.8 which provides the ability to separate subject from background using faster apertures, and is not a bad portrait lens.
I don't yet have a dedicated macro lens (I have my eye on the Sigma 150mm Macro). I currently use Kenko extension tubes with the 50mm or 70-300mm for macro.
Well, everyone has an opinion here of course - one of the best questions there is!
My answer to the initial question "What are good starter lenses for a beginner?" is really the highest quality lens the beginner can afford. Quality glass trumps everything if you ask me.
When I started out with digital, I was frustrated by not getting enough "keepers" because when I saw them full screen they were out of focus. When I finally got the 24-105 L from Canon, it was like a whole new world opened up and my passion came thru because I wasn't frustrated by as many focus issues.
Tho I will agree with those who say the beginner should probably have one or two primes, it is easy to get absorbed in a high quality zoom as well.
I say get the cheapest body and the most expensive lens you can afford. The glass is (in my humble opinion) more important than buying a body that is top of the line.
planetMitch
I agree, Mitch re: your comment on high grade lenses.
And the one good thing is that a 50mm lens can be excellent while not being expensive.
Of course, having tested some really fabulous 16 megapixel and higher resolution DSLRs, I am not sure I agree about getting the cheapest camera. With film that was probably true but not with digital.
Cheers! Peter
Post new comment