Photography

4745 readers

25 users here now

A community to post about photography:

We allow a wide range of topics here including; your own images, technical questions, gear talk, photography blogs etc. Please be respectful and don't spam.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Any recommendations for the most versatile, highest-quality lens for the R50 (for ~$600)? (lemm.ee)

submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

29 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Total beginner here, looking to buy my first camera and looking for a lens that would be able to deal with the widest range of situations (a zoom one) all in one package. I've got about 600usd to spend on it and I'm fully aware it's not much, but I want to get a good start.

I can't buy used ones where I live (even from online platforms around the world), so it'd have to be new.

At the moment my goal is to take photos of pretty much everything: nature (apart from moving animals), landscapes, streets, portraits, objects (large and small), architecture, and I also plan to film videos quite a bit. Nothing fast moving and no sports though.

I'd love to shoot in close-up macro, too, but I understand it's not possible within one lens.

What could you recommend?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Thanks, great insights.

No problem!

Could you recommend one or a few prime lenses for 600usd or so? For R50.

I did so in another post, there are a few decent options. If I had to choose one for you, it would be the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 DC DN Contemporary, although that might not be wide enough for your needs. Go check out the other reply.

And is it worth upgrading to a full frame camera or would R50 be great for a long time in photography in general?

I used crop-sensor DSLRs for 10 years before moving to full frame when I went to a mirrorless setup. Why did I move? Low light performance, a touch more subject isolation, and not having such a limited budget. That and most lenses these days being made for full frame sensors. You can use these lenses on a crop-body, but you're not getting any size/weight savings out of it beyond the extra focal length thanks to the crop factor (eg I would probably have a 70-300 lens instead of the bigger and heavier 150-500 I have now). The standout exception here is Fujifilm, since all they make are crop bodies, but their autofocus just wasn't as good as Sony/Canon. If it was more reliable than i would very likely be talking to you as a Fuji owner.

Full frame also comes with some downsides: more expensive bodies, more expensive lenses, shallower depth of field can work against you if you want more light, etc.

I would personally stick with the R50 while you learn. You're very unlikely to hit a wall on it any time soon and the "need" of full frame just isn't there for 80-90% of scenarios.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I've come to a conclusion that I'm either getting the stock lens (the RF-S 18-45mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM) or this sigma one (the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 DC DN Contemporary).

But as a beginner, I'd still love to ask you: It's five times the price of the stock lens, but does the quality improve proportionally? Would the pictures generally also be about 5x better, in some way at least?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

5x better? My initial reaction would be no. The only exception would be if you're going to be doing a lot of low light photography. On the wide side, the Sigma gathers 1.5x more light. On the narrow side, the Sigma gathers 3x more light. That could be the difference between getting or not getting a shot.

The Sigma will give you better subject isolation, better image quality/rendering, and better feel in hand. I suggest googling both lenses and looking at sample image galleries.

Wether or not this is worth the extra cost is your call.