# Is this a good deal?



## sactown024 (Aug 27, 2012)

i found someone on Craigslist that is selling his 17-85mm USM lens for $325 or trade for a 18-55mm kit lens+ $225. First thing, I want a good lens for portraits, is this a good choice? secondly, will it replace my 50mm 1.8 as far as brokeh, sharpness and overall quality?


----------



## MTVision (Aug 27, 2012)

sactown024 said:
			
		

> i found someone on Craigslist that is selling his 17-85mm USM lens for $325 or trade for a 18-55mm kit lens+ $225. First thing, I want a good lens for portraits, is this a good choice? secondly, will it replace my 50mm 1.8 as far as brokeh, sharpness and overall quality?



I'm not familiar with canon but is that 17-85 a variable aperture lens? Like 17-85 f/4.5-5.6?

Just going on the info you posted - I'd say it's probably not much better then the kit lens (18-55) if they're willing to trade for that and a little cash. A fast prime will probably always be a better performer then a cheapish zoom. I could be wrong - like I said I'm not familiar with canon. 

http://m.sears.com/productdetails.do?partNumber=00341410000P&sid=&psid=

^^^ this lens??


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 28, 2012)

Yeah that's the lens, I see mixed reviews on it....some love it some hate it :/ 

Anyone own this lens?


----------



## tirediron (Aug 28, 2012)

If I may, why are you worrying about buying another consumer-grade lens if you're trying to attract clients?  Gear like this does not cut it; it's not built well enough, isn't fast enough, and generally doesn't deliver across-the-focal-length-IQ consistantly well enough to be useful to a working professional.  Lenses you want to be looking at are Canon's 'L' line; 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, etc.  Work with what you've got and save for the good stuff!


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 28, 2012)

tirediron said:


> If I may, why are you worrying about buying another consumer-grade lens if you're trying to attract clients?  Gear like this does not cut it; it's not built well enough, isn't fast enough, and generally doesn't deliver across-the-focal-length-IQ consistantly well enough to be useful to a working professional.  Lenses you want to be looking at are Canon's 'L' line; 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, etc.  Work with what you've got and save for the good stuff!



not everyone can afford a $1,000+ lens, I just had a baby and need to set my priorities. I thought maybe this was a good lens sense it was a USM lens, thats why I came here to ask. I am pretty sure not every photographer is carrying around L series.

but i respect your opinion and I know what your saying, just not in my budget. I actually know someone that shoots in NYC and Denver and the only lens she uses is a 50mm 1.4 USM.


----------



## pgriz (Aug 28, 2012)

A fast 50mm prime on a full-frame camera gives a knowledgeable photographer a lot of options.  But "knowledge" is the operating word.  It also means that the subject matter of this photographer lends itself to be framed by a 50mm lens.  So the fact that a photographer you know is successfully using this lens may or may not be relevant to your situation. 

Given that you are just starting to explore photography, you need to build up your knowledge base before upgrading equipment - for example, how to consistently nail the focus, how to ensure that the light comliments your subject, how to frame the image to keep the foreground and/or background from distracting from your subject, how to compose the subject to make for a pleasing image...  All of this can be done with the equipment you currently have.  The next round of improvement would be the purchase of one or more speedlights (and modifiers), to give you the ability to control your light better.  In practice, almost no image is customer-ready without some post-processing, so investing in a good photo-editing program (and then learning to use it), will allow you to deliver the maximum potential of your equipment.

If you are doing all that, and you are still running into equipment limitations, then by all means consider an upgrade.  But if you look at the images posted by good photographers, you will find that often they are getting stellar results from consumer-level bodies and glass.  You also will see people with superb equipment, posting images that are nice snapshots.  The difference is knowledge.


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 28, 2012)

pgriz said:


> A fast 50mm prime on a full-frame camera gives a knowledgeable photographer a lot of options.  But "knowledge" is the operating word.  It also means that the subject matter of this photographer lends itself to be framed by a 50mm lens.  So the fact that a photographer you know is successfully using this lens may or may not be relevant to your situation.
> 
> Given that you are just starting to explore photography, you need to build up your knowledge base before upgrading equipment - for example, how to consistently nail the focus, how to ensure that the light comliments your subject, how to frame the image to keep the foreground and/or background from distracting from your subject, how to compose the subject to make for a pleasing image...  All of this can be done with the equipment you currently have.  The next round of improvement would be the purchase of one or more speedlights (and modifiers), to give you the ability to control your light better.  In practice, almost no image is customer-ready without some post-processing, so investing in a good photo-editing program (and then learning to use it), will allow you to deliver the maximum potential of your equipment.
> 
> If you are doing all that, and you are still running into equipment limitations, then by all means consider an upgrade.  But if you look at the images posted by good photographers, you will find that often they are getting stellar results from consumer-level bodies and glass.  You also will see people with superb equipment, posting images that are nice snapshots.  The difference is knowledge.



I have speedlites and consider myself quite knowledegable in lightroom 4 . I am looking to upgrade my lens not because i think its going to make me a better photographer but because i want something that has a faster and quieter focus, reliable, and something that will create very sharp images. Right now I have a 50mm 1.8 prime and its so loud that it wakes my baby up when taking photos of him. 

back on track, the more I read about this 17-85mm USM lens the less i want it... I have a few hundread dollars to spend on some photography equipment and I just thought a nice solid lens would be money well spent rather than a bag full of plastic.


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 28, 2012)

sactown024 said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > If I may, why are you worrying about buying another consumer-grade lens if you're trying to attract clients?  Gear like this does not cut it; it's not built well enough, isn't fast enough, and generally doesn't deliver across-the-focal-length-IQ consistantly well enough to be useful to a working professional.  Lenses you want to be looking at are Canon's 'L' line; 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, etc.  Work with what you've got and save for the good stuff!
> ...



No.. there are a whole lot of amateurs out there that claim to be professionals.... and they all are using low end equipment. Look on facebook.... thousands of them.


----------



## pgriz (Aug 28, 2012)

I'm sure you already know this, but as a rule, primes are sharper than zooms, and generally, have faster optics (ie, larger maximum aperture) than zooms.  On the other hand, zooms are more convenient, and allow you to have a variety of fields of view without changing lenses.  At the top end, the zooms are very close in sharpness to the primes, but this is achieved with a brick of a lens (heavy! and bulky! and expensive!).  In my case, I've had the 17-85mm and upgraded it to the 24-105mm L f/4 lens.  It meets my needs quite well, but it was not cheap (had to save for a year).  I have other lenses for specific purposes, but this is the one that is my "walk-around" lens.  However...  it is not the sharpest zoom, or the fastest, and under specific circumstances (low light, or the need for a very thin DOF), it is not ideal.

If you don't mind changing lenses, then perhaps a set of primes may be the way to go.  However L-series primes are all over $800 new, so perhaps buying used is the way to reduce the cost.  That brings its own set of challenges.  Personally, I'd suggest saving until you can afford the lens upgrade you want.  

As for your noisy lens, perhaps focusing manually will allow you to avoid making the noise.  To do that, you can enable your center AF point and use it to help you acquire the focus manually.


----------



## rokvi (Aug 28, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> sactown024 said:
> 
> 
> > tirediron said:
> ...



I had one that I am friends with, who pm'd me to ask me if I could look over his last set and "see if I like them" I took this as asking for critique and decided to be honest...We don't talk much anymore 

still don't know why he asked me? Im no pro.


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 28, 2012)

rokvi said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > sactown024 said:
> ...



Understood! I avoid them like the plague! 

Normally if I see somebody that posts a thread containing "I need help learning to focus, How do I get correct exposure, or how do I do this "really simple thing" and then posts another thread about "I feel comfortable with my camera, and am going to start a business".. I just add them to my IGNORE list, I figure if they are PRO's, they don't need my help!


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 28, 2012)

You already have a decent lens in that category and a pretty good lens in the category. Why would you trade the decent one and good one for another that is iffy to decent? 
People seriously underestimate the quality of that cheap kit lens. For a consumer grade lens? It's really VERY good and VERY capable.
What is the budget you want to spend here? 
MORE lenses doesn't equal better. Better lenses equal better. You are not going to get the sharpness and quality of the 50mm prime in a zoom lens under about $500-which will still not have the sharpness of the prime lens. Prime lenses are the sharpest of lenses because there is no compromise across the range of the zoom. 
There are a few decent zooms that will work well under the $500 mark. They aren't going to rival the 24-70 f/2.8, but they are going to be better than the kit lens and the one you are looking at.


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 28, 2012)

^^^THIS! Good technique, good camera handling, and experience will give excellent sharp photos even with a inexpensive kit lens.

A top end PRO lens won't really help if you don't have those things to back you up!


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 28, 2012)

I am trying my best not to be rude, but i asked a simple question and now everyone is putting words in my mouth. 

CGIPSON- I am sure there are a lot of amertures out there yes, but there is a middle between a amerture and a pro, there people out there that do it as a job and arnt carrying around L series lens, like Mleek said, you dont need a awesome lens to take awesome photos. 

Rokvi- I was asking about the quality of a lens, I wasnt asking how to improve my skills or looking for someone to tell me learn the basics first. Just wanted clarification on a lens, hense the title. 

PGriz- thanks for the kind info!

Mleek- I understand what you are saying but I am not trying to get more lens or sayign the more the better, I was actually trying to replace a lens for somehting a little better. I know the kit lens can take great photos if used correctly, but there is a reason why there are better lenses out there, right? they take better photos than the kit lens, right?

again, not trying to be rude, just clarifying i was asking a simple question about the quality of a certain lens, not how bad of a photographer I am and how I need to get down the basics first, i know that.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 28, 2012)

I guess I didn't really summarize my ramblings... Meds haven't kicked in yet! In short: You aren't making an upgrade worth the price with that lens. 
What are you allowing yourself for a budget? We really can point you to some better equipment if you want to upgrade.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 28, 2012)

I wanted to add another after thought-You are thinking lenses. What did you decide to do for lighting equipment? At least one good speedlite would be my first priority for someone starting out where you are before upgrading lenses. You have really good stuff to start with and adding more ability would be a wiser choice than adding a new lens yet.


----------



## MTVision (Aug 28, 2012)

My opinion (cus you know you want it) is to forget that lens for now. You don't really gain anything by it except it's a little longer. But it's slower to start with - only opens to f/4.5 @ 17mm whereas the kit opened to f/3.5 @ 18mm (I think). It definitely won't be an improvement over your 50mm. If your going to spend money on a zoom get one without a variable aperture. You might look at third party brands too. I've never used this specific lenses but I have heard good things about the Nikon version


http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0000A1G05/ref=redir_mdp_mobile

A used copy is probably in your budget. 

Or you could just stick with the setup you have now and keep putting money away to get a really nice lens.


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 28, 2012)

well i sold my fish eye lens for $150, if you point me to another prime i could sell my 50mm 1.8 for maybe $90, 1 week old.  and then i have a couple hundread laying around so maybe $400ish.... of course i could save for a couple weeks and get more, just not looking to invest in a $1k lens at this time.


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 28, 2012)

MLeeK said:


> I wanted to add another after thought-You are thinking lenses. What did you decide to do for lighting equipment? At least one good speedlite would be my first priority for someone starting out where you are before upgrading lenses. You have really good stuff to start with and adding more ability would be a wiser choice than adding a new lens yet.



I ended up buying the Yongnuo 560 II after someone from here (including you) recomended it. No stand or umbrella yet.


----------



## MTVision (Aug 28, 2012)

sactown024 said:
			
		

> well i sold my fish eye lens for $150, if you point me to another prime i could sell my 50mm 1.8 for maybe $90, 1 week old.  and then i have a couple hundread laying around so maybe $400ish.... of course i could save for a couple weeks and get more, just not looking to invest in a $1k lens at this time.



Yeah I wasn't thinking a 1k lens. For me, I wouldnt invest in a 1k lens at this point either - I have another baby on the way and they are expensive!

Is there a reason you want to get rid of the 50mm? The only other prime I can think of would be like an 85mm or maybe the 50mm 1.4 - not sure of the price of either of those.


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 28, 2012)

MTVision said:


> My opinion (cus you know you want it) is to forget that lens for now. You don't really gain anything by it except it's a little longer. But it's slower to start with - only opens to f/4.5 @ 17mm whereas the kit opened to f/3.5 @ 18mm (I think). It definitely won't be an improvement over your 50mm. If your going to spend money on a zoom get one without a variable aperture. You might look at third party brands too. I've never used this specific lenses but I have heard good things about the Nikon version
> 
> 
> Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 SP XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) for Canon Digital SLR Cameras:Amazon:Camera & Photo
> ...




yeah i thought about 3rd party, was actually considering the sigma 50mm 1.4 but now I am reading about all sorts of AF issues.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 28, 2012)

I wouldn't recommend selling your 50mm. Not until you have learned much more and upgraded to another prime that you really love. It's one of those lenses that people go through phases with. At first it's too tight, restricting and they hate it because of the no-zoom thing. Then they find they NEED it's low light capability. Somewhere in there they discover it's sharpness over their other stuff and fall in love with that. At which point they learn how to use a prime. 
You're still in the learning phase of exposure too and this lens will come in INCREDIBLY handy as you are doing some things with that. 
So, I am suggesting you bring your budget down by that $90 bucks or so for now. 

So... At $300 what can you get: 
Used Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 Amazon.com: Used and New: Tamron AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di-II LD SP Aspherical (IF) Zoom Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 28, 2012)

sactown024 said:


> MTVision said:
> 
> 
> > My opinion (cus you know you want it) is to forget that lens for now. You don't really gain anything by it except it's a little longer. But it's slower to start with - only opens to f/4.5 @ 17mm whereas the kit opened to f/3.5 @ 18mm (I think). It definitely won't be an improvement over your 50mm. If your going to spend money on a zoom get one without a variable aperture. You might look at third party brands too. I've never used this specific lenses but I have heard good things about the Nikon version
> ...



Why are you thinking of getting rid of the 50mm you have now?


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 28, 2012)

MLeeK said:


> I wouldn't recommend selling your 50mm. Not until you have learned much more and upgraded to another prime that you really love. It's one of those lenses that people go through phases with. At first it's too tight, restricting and they hate it because of the no-zoom thing. Then they find they NEED it's low light capability. Somewhere in there they discover it's sharpness over their other stuff and fall in love with that. At which point they learn how to use a prime.
> You're still in the learning phase of exposure too and this lens will come in INCREDIBLY handy as you are doing some things with that.
> So, I am suggesting you bring your budget down by that $90 bucks or so for now.
> 
> ...



you wouldnt recomend replacing the 50mm 1.8 with a 50mm 1.4 USM?


the lens you linked would replace my kit lens right? I will be shooting mostly portraits and hopefully some weddings, that being said is the lens you linked a good choice or should I get something with a focal range like this

Amazon.com: Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 SP XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) for Canon Digital SLR Cameras: Electronics


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 28, 2012)

MLeeK said:


> sactown024 said:
> 
> 
> > MTVision said:
> ...



Well i origonally wanted the 1.4 USM but couldnt afford it, now that i sold my fish eye i can afford it. to be honest i am just going off what folks have said on these forums about how muhc better it is than the 1.8. faster, quieter, better brokeh, better buld quality etc..


----------



## MTVision (Aug 28, 2012)

sactown024 said:
			
		

> Well i origonally wanted the 1.4 USM but couldnt afford it, now that i sold my fish eye i can afford it. to be honest i am just going off what folks have said on these forums about how muhc better it is than the 1.8. faster, quieter, better brokeh, better buld quality etc..



I've heard the canon 50 1.4 is better then the 1.8. It's up to you whether it's worth it or not. The 50mm 1.8, I'm sure, is perfectly capable of taking great shots. 

Is there a specific reason you want a new lens? Don't buy just because you can - buy because there is something that is holding you back. It's also always better to wait until you know exactly what you need - that way you don't have lenses that just sit around with no use.


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 28, 2012)

MTVision said:


> sactown024 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



im sure it is capable of great pictures, i know it is. BUT i want something with faster focusing, quieter, sharper, better brokeh etc... I already have lenses sitting around that came with the setup, like the fish eye which i just sold, i am trying to sell the stuff i dont use and get one solid lens for shooting portraits....


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 28, 2012)

sactown024 said:


> MLeeK said:
> 
> 
> > I wouldn't recommend selling your 50mm. Not until you have learned much more and upgraded to another prime that you really love. It's one of those lenses that people go through phases with. At first it's too tight, restricting and they hate it because of the no-zoom thing. Then they find they NEED it's low light capability. Somewhere in there they discover it's sharpness over their other stuff and fall in love with that. At which point they learn how to use a prime.
> ...




I would personally prefer the 28-75, BUT on a crop sensor you may well feel the pinch at 28mm. A LOT of people say it's too tight for crop sensor. HOWEVER! I find I get into a LOT of trouble with the 17-50 at the wide end with the distortion issues. I try to never shoot at the wide end if I can. 
Second reason: I also have full frame cameras and the 17-50 will not work on them. The 28-75 will. 

I would not sell off the 50 until you 1. know that 50mm is the focal length you want in a good prime and 2. have the money to upgrade it. 

If you are considering weddings do not buy any variable aperture lenses. They will kill you in a church. You are going to NEED the f/2.8 lenses. You are also going to need much better quality than crap, so stop trying to upgrade to "a little better" and save your money. You can't get around needing good lenses and damn good skill for a wedding. 
I use the 17-50 for weddings, but I am not happy with it overall. It performs for me without fail, but it is not the quality that I want. I will upgrade it this year because of that. When I bought it I was happy as a lark with it's quality. 

You are aiming for professional. Stop putting band-aids on a heart attack. You can't skimp on glass for the rigorous use you are wanting to put your equipment through. Start putting money away and buy good quality. Had I done that to begin with I'd be shooting with a 24-70 today that runs over $2000 and I would not have wasted money on temporary fixes. 
Your camera body is going to need to be replaced down the line as well. It'll serve you well-for now. But eventually you will see the light-or lack of it-in your camera body and you'll need more. The dynamic range, noise level and overall abilities on an entry level body just won't cut it. I had a girl shoot a wedding with me a couple of weeks ago with your camera body. She has shot a few and she's now ready to upgrade and is kicking herself for thinking her camera and budget equipment would cut it as the primary photographer. She's going to keep second shooting for me and get the experience, but she's so disappointed in herself for thinking she could do it all with just any equipment. She's now putting everything she makes shooting toward a new body and two lenses that she feels she needs. 
I am not telling you this to discourage you, but to tell you that 'good enough' is only good enough when you are on the outside coming in. Once you are in here and doing it you are going to want to go back and kick your newbie ass for thinking it. You will waste a lot of money if you start out purchasing 'for now' equipment.


----------



## MTVision (Aug 28, 2012)

sactown024 said:
			
		

> im sure it is capable of great pictures, i know it is. BUT i want something with faster focusing, quieter, sharper, better brokeh etc... I already have lenses sitting around that came with the setup, like the fish eye which i just sold, i am trying to sell the stuff i dont use and get one solid lens for shooting portraits....



If that's what you want then get it. But like MLeek said you might want to wait and find out if 50 is the focal length you like - especially if you've only had it for a week. 85 is probably a better focal length for portraits then the 50. But....85 might be a little tight indoors. 

It's bokeh BTW.


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 28, 2012)

MLeeK said:


> sactown024 said:
> 
> 
> > MLeeK said:
> ...



I agree with everything your saying, i got this camera at a ridiculous price with tons of extras and I was on a budget. I do plan to save and start getting some better lenses but that money will be coming from shooting photos, portraits, etc... The 50mm 1.4 is only $200 more than the 1.8  so my thought is to get a solid portrait lens that will make me some money to allow me to upgrade to high end lenses. 

I know i like the 50mm focal length just from shooting this last week or so with the 1.8 which is why i was thinking of upgrading to the 1.4. If i did buy it I would have the kit lens, the 50mm 1.4 and the 55-250, I would stop there until i started making enough money to upgrade to the good stuff. 

I really just want one solid lens, what you said is correct, i shouldnt waste my money on junk, althought the 1.4 is junk to a pro, I thought it would be a good lens to get started with rather than the 1.8 that i have to worry about breaking just from looking at it. 

thoughts?


----------



## pgriz (Aug 28, 2012)

You know, there are two ways to get to pro gear.  One is very expensive - you buy and learn to use the gear that is needed for the job at hand.  The second way is more expensive - you buy incrementally; and for quite a while you keep fighting both the equipment and your own inexperience.  And that's assuming your clients are happy enough with the results.  If not, then the second way is much, much more expensive.  

Before you decide to do things such as wedding photography, do yourself a favour and search the threads on TPF on "Wedding Photography" going back maybe two years.  There are some threads documenting disasters, and some where disaster was averted, and some which went well.  Read the equipment lists and experience of the ones that worked.  Compare that to the ones that didn't.  You'll start seeing some common strands in these discussions.  Learn from the experiences of others - it is much easier on the pocketbook, your mental equilibrium, and your reputation when you learn from the mistakes and don't do them yourself.

Also go to the web and look up some really good wedding photographers - I don't have a resource list, but I am sure other will easily volunteer such a list.  Then ponder whether you have the ability and equipment to deliver those results.  I have a thread somewhere here where I described my own experiences with weddings - which "pros" worked and which didn't.


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 28, 2012)

what would you consider and "acceptable" slr body to shoot a wedding?

t3i? t4i? 60D? 7D? Mark II?

where is the line drawn from entry level to acceptable for big gigs?


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 28, 2012)

You have one solid lens that you aren't using to it's potential yet. When you do that then it's time to upgrade. You won't be able to shoot with the 50mm f/1.4 at f/1.4 yet by far. That takes some talent and knowledge. So why not use what you have until you get to the NEED part. 
As for noisy focus, no one cares in portraiture about noisy focus. You aren;t ready to shoot a wedding yet where noisy focus MIGHT matter. 

You are throwing money at this hobby without learning the craft at all. You are buying something new every other day and it seems that that new gear is going to make you a professional. It's not going to give you the amazing results you anticipate until you maximize the use of the one you have. 

For the type of photography you are thinking chances are you won't use your 50mm as much as you will your zooms anyway, so again you are throwing money into something you just don't know yet. You need to get out there and start mastering the craft of portraiture and utilizing the lenses you have. By doing that it will tell you what you NEED down the line. You'll discover that you like to shoot THIS way and with THIS focal length. Chances are it's probably not the 50. It's going to either be the 85 or something around 28 or 35 for a prime. Chances are even bigger for what you are talking about in terms of your goals that you will be wanting zooms  most of all and you may just be happy to have just the old 50 1.8. 

I have never upgraded my 50. I use it somewhat, but it's not ideal for what I do. Which, by the way is much what you are aiming for plus sports. I shoot portraits and weddings. I use the 50 SOME for portraits, but I really love my 28 on crop sensor and 85 on full frame for primes. Most of all I use my 70-200 f/2.8 for EVERYTHING. If you had told me I'd choose that lens for nearly everything 5 years ago (while I had one) I'd have laughed at you and said there's no way. It's too tight even on a full frame. 

You need experience to determine your true needs and wants. You can go ahead and buy the 50 if you truly believe that is what you need. You might even get lucky and find it really is what you need. I just think it's silly for a newbie to start throwing tons of $ into gear before you develop a style and know what you need from EXPERIENCE instead of reading what others need. 
None of us here shoot the same and rarely do we choose to do things the same way as another would. You will be exactly the same and do things the way YOU like to do. That's the beauty of this art. You can do it YOUR way. However, you have to figure out what your way is before you start throwing away money.

You are the one who says you don't have a grand or so just laying around. Slow down. Make your selections wisely. If you feel you are going to spend the money elsewhere and won't have it saved-buy adorama or B&H gift certificates so you can't spend it elsewhere.


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 28, 2012)

sactown024 said:


> what would you consider and "acceptable" slr body to shoot a wedding?
> 
> t3i? t4i? 60D? 7D? Mark II?
> 
> where is the line drawn from entry level to acceptable for big gigs?



an Amateur with a 1Dx wont get shots anywhere near as good as a knowledgeable hobbyist (a couple of YEARS of experience) with a entry level camera (say a T3i) would... and a PRO  (more years, and specialized knowledge) would do even better.

It ain't the hardware, it is the photographer... and the top level bodies don't even have an AUTO mode, which is a problem for some people.


----------



## MTVision (Aug 28, 2012)

sactown024 said:
			
		

> I agree with everything your saying, i got this camera at a ridiculous price with tons of extras and I was on a budget. I do plan to save and start getting some better lenses but that money will be coming from shooting photos, portraits, etc... The 50mm 1.4 is only $200 more than the 1.8  so my thought is to get a solid portrait lens that will make me some money to allow me to upgrade to high end lenses.
> 
> I know i like the 50mm focal length just from shooting this last week or so with the 1.8 which is why i was thinking of upgrading to the 1.4. If i did buy it I would have the kit lens, the 50mm 1.4 and the 55-250, I would stop there until i started making enough money to upgrade to the good stuff.
> 
> ...



I liked the 50 too. In fact it didn't leave my camera for over 8 months. Now I'm realizing it's not my ideal focal length and I rarely use it. My whole point is that a week isn't really enough time to determine anything.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 28, 2012)

sactown024 said:


> what would you consider and "acceptable" slr body to shoot a wedding?
> 
> t3i? t4i? 60D? 7D? Mark II?
> 
> where is the line drawn from entry level to acceptable for big gigs?



You'll be fine with what you have for starting out. However you WILL feel the pinch of it eventually too. I shoot now with a 5d2 and a 7D. I feel a little pinch here and there even on my 7D and a lot of pinch on my 5d2 for certain things.  I can see a difference in the more precise exposure between the two and I wish I could use the 5d2 in those situations that I can't because of it. Penny definitely felt a huge pinch from her T2i to my 5D2. And a good pinch with my 7D
You will create great images with what you have, but down the line you WILL find the NEED to upgrade. Until then you are just fine with what you have and that's really the point with the lenses too. Until you FEEL what you need, why do you want to throw money into them like a crap shoot?

If it were a matter of an acceptable level I'd never have accepted Pen shooting with her T2i. She's got great knowledge and skill with it, so it's just fine.


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 28, 2012)

I am throwing money at the hobby because I am learning so much and I feel my equipment is minimizing my ability to go tot he next step. Maybe i havnt mastered each peice of photography but I am the type of person with any hobby to learn it all at once slowly rather than master one thing at a time. Flash for instance, everyone says master NL first then worry about flash. To me, thats dumb, why master something if you know you will be using something else months down the road. To someone else that may be a better way to learn but no one can judge someone's way of learning.


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 28, 2012)

once again the thread is getting way off subject. 

I appreciate all of your input, maybe ill stick with the 50mm 1.8 for a month or so and see if i want to upgrade.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 28, 2012)

You have yet to master anything. You've yet to post one good portrait without major BASIC issues. Believe me, you are not using the lenses you have in any way to their  fullest potential and buying more lenses is just not the answer, but  hey! I've only been around the block for about 20 years now.

Flash changes everything and if you don't know how to do the basics flash will be sacrificing you knowledge big time. Your future weddings-you won't be able to use flash in churches and you have to know those basics. 

My final answer to you? Buy whatever you want. We don't have a clue what we are talking about because you have learned it all this past month that you've owned your camera.


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 28, 2012)

MLeeK said:


> You have yet to master anything. You've yet to post one good portrait without major BASIC issues. Believe me, you are not using the lenses you have in any way to their  fullest potential and buying more lenses is just not the answer, but  hey! I've only been around the block for about 20 years now.
> 
> Flash changes everything and if you don't know how to do the basics flash will be sacrificing you knowledge big time. Your future weddings-you won't be able to use flash in churches and you have to know those basics.
> 
> My final answer to you? Buy whatever you want. We don't have a clue what we are talking about because you have learned it all this past month that you've owned your camera.




i guess the internet puts across the wrong vide because i feel like your taking me the wrong way.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 28, 2012)

I just can't help you. That's it. You are going to charge forth without any thought to really learning FIRST. If that's the way you need to go, then go for it. The way you are insisting that these lenses are limiting to you is pure BS at this point and you don't even know it yet, nor do you want to even bother to learn what you don't know. I can't help you.


----------



## IByte (Aug 28, 2012)

MTVision said:
			
		

> Yeah I wasn't thinking a 1k lens. For me, I wouldnt invest in a 1k lens at this point either - I have another baby on the way and they are expensive!
> 
> Is there a reason you want to get rid of the 50mm? The only other prime I can think of would be like an 85mm or maybe the 50mm 1.4 - not sure of the price of either of those.



My nifty 50 1.4 was around $440. new and a little extra for 2 day delivery.  If anything I would recommend that lens as previously stated 85 1.8.  It's not that sweet krispy creme bokeh 1.4 but for a price 495.00 it's a great deal  OP.


----------



## MTVision (Aug 28, 2012)

IByte said:
			
		

> My nifty 50 1.4 was around $440. new and a little extra for 2 day delivery.  If anything I would recommend that lens as previously stated 85 1.8.  It's not that sweet krispy creme bokeh 1.4 but for a price 495.00 it's a great deal  OP.



But that's Nikon your talking about right?? Op shoots canon


----------



## Tee (Aug 28, 2012)

In reply to the original question: no, it's not a good deal. Your 50 1.8 is perfectly acceptable. Secondly, if you're not familiar with Zack Arias and his minimalist and one light approach, I recommend looking at his YouTube stuff (I'll look for a few links when I get home).  Basically, he does an awesome job of dispelling the latest and greatest mindset (which, admittedly, I fell into).  It's definitely a great way to approach photography in this "gotta have it" age.


----------



## tirediron (Aug 28, 2012)

sactown024 said:


> once again the thread is getting way off subject.
> 
> I appreciate all of your input, maybe ill stick with the 50mm 1.8 for a month or so and see if i want to upgrade.



That is the most sensible statement yet!  Don't buy *ANYTHING* until you know what you *NEED*!  The 50mm 1.4 is going to get you NOTHING at this stage except an emptier wallet.  You've said you don't want to spend a thousand or more dollars on a lens.  I hate to break it to you, but good glass costs!  The plus side is that $1-2000 lens will last you many years.  

Having said that, let me re-emphasize the points made earlier.  From your posts and the images you've put up, it seems to me that most of your problems relate to a basic lack of understanding of the principles involved, DoF, exposure/metering, etc.  Do you know what the inverse square law relates to?  What am I talking about when I use the term "Golden mean"?  What is Zone VII?  These are all part of the basic knowledge package that you need.

My suggestion would be to join up with a local camera club where you can go out on shoots and learn baby, learn!  There are usually some retired pros and/or very, very skilled amateurs who can actually show you how to improve (rather than just tell you as is all we can do).  You can do it, but first you have to learn how much you yet don't know!


----------



## KmH (Aug 28, 2012)

The End.


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 28, 2012)

KmH said:


> The End.



Uhhh.. Keith.. you missed it again!  

EDIT: My mistake.. that was not a CLOSE!  lol


----------



## IByte (Aug 28, 2012)

sactown024 said:
			
		

> I am throwing money at the hobby because I am learning so much and I feel my equipment is minimizing my ability to go tot he next step. Maybe i havnt mastered each peice of photography but I am the type of person with any hobby to learn it all at once slowly rather than master one thing at a time. Flash for instance, everyone says master NL first then worry about flash. To me, thats dumb, why master something if you know you will be using something else months down the road. To someone else that may be a better way to learn but no one can judge someone's way of learning.



Why learn NL before Flash?  Probably people need to learn the basics before branching out.   My trolly sense is tingling.


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 28, 2012)

MLeeK said:


> I just can't help you. That's it. You are going to charge forth without any thought to really learning FIRST. If that's the way you need to go, then go for it. The way you are insisting that these lenses are limiting to you is pure BS at this point and you don't even know it yet, nor do you want to even bother to learn what you don't know. I can't help you.


t

Mleek, I am not ignoring your statements and I use your knowledge, I know i have a lto to learn, no doubt. I am trying to get it across to you that i want a new lens, thats why i am posting here, doesnt matter why i want one, I just asked a simple question is it a good deal? yes we got side tracked to the 50mm 1.4 and again i was just asking if it was a better lens than the 1.8, a simple yes it or no its not and a reason why would be fine but I dont need eveyone to tell me I need to learn the basics, thats a given, it does not change the fact I want a new lens. 

i still respect your opinion and I am not trying to come off as a jerk, please dont take it that way.


----------



## IByte (Aug 28, 2012)

MTVision said:
			
		

> But that's Nikon your talking about right?? Op shoots canon



....oops and that's why I'm still a novice =8)


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 28, 2012)

sactown024 said:


> MLeeK said:
> 
> 
> > I just can't help you. That's it. You are going to charge forth without any thought to really learning FIRST. If that's the way you need to go, then go for it. The way you are insisting that these lenses are limiting to you is pure BS at this point and you don't even know it yet, nor do you want to even bother to learn what you don't know. I can't help you.
> ...


I am giving you the answer: No, it's not a good deal and nothing will be a good deal if it isn't what you need down the road. I answered in response to the statement that you don't have $1000's to spend and want to make good choices and explained what you need to make proper choices, but you don't seem to get that and would prefer to spend your $ on a lens you may or may not need down the line. 
Do what you gotta do.


----------



## pgriz (Aug 28, 2012)

ah, that's the issue?  You just want a new lens?  Then, by all means, go get it.  Just be truthful to yourself that it won't change much as for as image-making is concerned.

However, if you want to improve to the point that you can consider earning money at this activity, then there's a bit more effort required.  

Learning something, is like constructing a house - a solid foundation provides good support for the structure that is built on top.  What components are there in this foundation?  Here are a few:

1)  Understanding light (hard light, soft light, light temperature, light intensity, light balance (if more than one source), and its cousin, shadows.  This also explores diffusion, reflection, transmission of light.
2)  Understanding Depth of field and its relation to aperture, focal length, and sensor size.
3)  Understanding shutter speed and its relation to capture of motion.
4)  Understanding composition - what arrangements are pleasing to the eye, and why
5)  Understanding posing, either single or in groups.
6)  Understanding the capabilities and limits of "your" equipment (what's the dynamic range?  which iso speeds give good or acceptable noise performance?  What is the sharpness and distortion profile of the lenses you use?  Where do you get Chromatic abberation, and diffraction?).

Then there is technique and skill - handholding technique to minimize camera shake, panning technique to capture motion, anticipation to capture the key moment, ability to focus either manually or assisted to place the focus and DOF where you need it...  

And after the image is taken, there is the post-processing that is done to polish the diamond, to extract the maximum amount of goodness that is present in the image. 

Notice that the first five are equipment independent.   If you know the first five, you can deliver stunning images with basic equipment.  But if you don't know this, then the manufacturers and retailers will love you, for you will always be looking for solutions in the tools, and they will always want to sell you "better" tools.  It is very seductive to think that the only thing preventing you from creating gorgeous images is the equipment.  It takes you off the hook.  It gives you a ready-made excuse.  And it would be false.

That's why we're telling you that if the objective is to learn enough to earn money, buying a lens won't get you very far down that particular road.  But if that's not the road you want to take, who are we to tell you how to spend your money?


----------



## MTVision (Aug 28, 2012)

pgriz said:
			
		

> ah, that's the issue?  You just want a new lens?  Then, by all means, go get it.  Just be truthful to yourself that it won't change much as for as image-making is concerned.
> 
> However, if you want to improve to the point that you can consider earning money at this activity, then there's a bit more effort required.
> 
> ...



I love all your posts! They are so well-written and full of valuable information!!


----------



## pgriz (Aug 28, 2012)

Thanks, Megan.  Kind words.  I don't have much, but I do like to share...


----------



## mjhoward (Aug 28, 2012)

sactown024 said:


> i found someone on Craigslist that is selling his 17-85mm USM lens for $325 or trade for a 18-55mm kit lens+ $225. First thing, I want a good lens for portraits, is this a good choice? secondly, will it replace my 50mm 1.8 as far as brokeh, sharpness and overall quality?



It's only marginally better than the old 18-55mm kit lens, a difference that you're likely to never notice unless you were conducting lab experiments.  As far as the "brokeh", it will likely be a bit better since it uses 6 rounded aperture blades rather than the 5 straight blades of the 50 1.8 but something tells me you were referring to the _amount_ of blur, not the quality of it, which will depend on a number of factors.  The 50 is likely to be sharper as well and they are both made of cheap plastic, so equal quality. So to answer your question, no that wouldn't be worth it.  BTW, you don't need a 1k lens... You can get a good constant f/2.8 third party zoom lens for ~$400 pretty easily.


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 29, 2012)

mjhoward said:


> sactown024 said:
> 
> 
> > i found someone on Craigslist that is selling his 17-85mm USM lens for $325 or trade for a 18-55mm kit lens+ $225. First thing, I want a good lens for portraits, is this a good choice? secondly, will it replace my 50mm 1.8 as far as brokeh, sharpness and overall quality?
> ...



your the first person in this 4 page thread that has actually answered my question, thank you for the input!


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 29, 2012)

pgriz said:


> ah, that's the issue?  You just want a new lens?  Then, by all means, go get it.  Just be truthful to yourself that it won't change much as for as image-making is concerned.
> 
> However, if you want to improve to the point that you can consider earning money at this activity, then there's a bit more effort required.
> 
> ...



yes, i understand there are basics to photography and a lot to learn just like building cars or houses or anything else in this world, that is the obvious, I would hope everyone starting a hobby would uinderstand this concept. BUT this doesnt mean you have to learn everything using basic equipment, it can be learned using better equipment and getting better results each time you learn something new. 

But, on a side note, I just discovered glassandgear.com which you can rent lenses super cheap. At least this way i can test it to see if its worth the extra money.


----------



## MTVision (Aug 29, 2012)

sactown024 said:
			
		

> your the first person in this 4 page thread that has actually answered my question, thank you for the input!





			
				MTVision said:
			
		

> My opinion (cus you know you want it) is to forget that lens for now. You don't really gain anything by it except it's a little longer. But it's slower to start with - only opens to f/4.5 @ 17mm whereas the kit opened to f/3.5 @ 18mm (I think). It definitely won't be an improvement over your 50mm. If your going to spend money on a zoom get one without a variable aperture. You might look at third party brands too. I've never used this specific lenses but I have heard good things about the Nikon version
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0000A1G05/ref=redir_mdp_mobile
> 
> ...


...


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 29, 2012)

Their rental prices are awesome. Their shipping prices make up for it though! 
I think renting is a great idea to try things out!


----------



## tirediron (Aug 29, 2012)

sactown024 said:


> ...yes, i understand there are basics to photography and a lot to learn just like building cars or houses or anything else in this world, that is the obvious, I would hope everyone starting a hobby would uinderstand this concept. BUT this doesnt mean you have to learn everything using basic equipment, it can be learned using better equipment and getting better results each time you learn something new...


True...  you don't have to, but today's basic equipment is so advanced that  unless you know why you need to upgrade, you probably don't really need to.  The reason that you have received most of the answers that you have is because there are a number of us with a fair few years behind the lens, and we have all seen far too many people decide to run out and buy another piece of equipment because they thing it will improve their images.  They are almost always disapointed.  Just to put things in perspective, compare your current camera and kits lens to the 4x5 field camera that Ansel Adams used to make his iconic "Half Dome" image.  The image quality that your kit is able to render compared to that which Adams used is many, many, MANY orders of magnitude better, so...


----------



## pgriz (Aug 29, 2012)

@ sactown024: 90-98% of poorly performing equipment when one is a newbie, is due to user error or lack of knowledge/skill. When you have the knowledge and skill, that number is usually 90-98% due to equipment. And by knowing exactly what you can/should expect from your equipment, you will be a much smarter buyer.

Where the better equipment stands apart from the basic stuff is at the edges: low-light, fast action, extreme closeup or telephoto, high dynamic range, challenging lighting situations, etc. Weddings require good low light equipment (fast lenses, good AF mechanism, excellent high-ISO performance, sharpness and resolution). So do sports under less-than-ideal conditions. So does photojournalism, where ruggedness, weather-proof seals, easy access to controls, and reliable performance all make the difference between getting the shot and coming home empty-handed. 

Studio photography, nature photography, landscape photography, and urban photography are all eminently do-able with basic equipment, because they rarely present extreme conditions. 

We've given the following advice many times: buy the equipment to accomodate the shooting you are going to do. We're not saying for you not to get gear. We ARE saying when you get gear, know WHY you are getting it, and HOW it will help you do things that you currently can't do. And to know the Why and How, you need experience. I'm all for renting gear to understand what that gear is about, but to get the most learning usage out of it, you should try to do side-by-side tests (old gear, new rented gear) to see if the improvements justify the cost.

Edit:  Dang, I type slow.  Tirediron beat me to it with basically the same advice...


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 29, 2012)

tirediron said:


> sactown024 said:
> 
> 
> > ...yes, i understand there are basics to photography and a lot to learn just like building cars or houses or anything else in this world, that is the obvious, I would hope everyone starting a hobby would uinderstand this concept. BUT this doesnt mean you have to learn everything using basic equipment, it can be learned using better equipment and getting better results each time you learn something new...
> ...



maybe i am being ignorant or maybe its because I am younger and this is more attractive to the veteran photographers but i dont see whats so great about this, not my style...

Moon and Half Dome by Ansel Adams 


as far as glassandgear.com the shipping was only $15 to my camera shop a mile down the street from my house.


----------



## tirediron (Aug 29, 2012)

What I meant was, that with a camera that didn't have a fraction of the capability yours does and a single, fixed lens, he was able to produce an image that is recognized all over the world.  Regardless of whether you like or not (I do) you have to admit that it's a photographic icon.  My point was:  learn to work with what you have.  Zoom not wide enough?  Move back further, or try shooting a panorama...  Up until only a few years ago, having multiple lenses for your camera was a real luxury.  The 35mm SLR and 50mm 1.8 lens was almost the universal standard!


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 29, 2012)

sactown024 said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > sactown024 said:
> ...



Part of why you aren't very impressed with the Ansel Adams image is lack of knowledge. Part of the appreciation is in the knowing of what went into that image. It may not be your cup of tea. It's not mine either, but it's an impressive image  and there is a REASON that Ansel Adams is the icon that he is. 
You simply lack knowledge. You could be gaining it as you sit here trying to purchase new lenses or you could keep purchasing lenses and have a great amount of gear that is pretty useless.


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 29, 2012)

tirediron said:


> What I meant was, that with a camera that didn't have a fraction of the capability yours does and a single, fixed lens, he was able to produce an image that is recognized all over the world.  Regardless of whether you like or not (I do) you have to admit that it's a photographic icon.  My point was:  learn to work with what you have.  Zoom not wide enough?  Move back further, or try shooting a panorama...  Up until only a few years ago, having multiple lenses for your camera was a real luxury.  The 35mm SLR and 50mm 1.8 lens was almost the universal standard!



yeah i hear what you are saying.


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 29, 2012)

MLeeK said:


> sactown024 said:
> 
> 
> > tirediron said:
> ...



art is suppose to be attractive to the eye, its not attractive period.  doesnt matter what went into it, maybe it was amazing for its time  period but so was the 1994 honda civic back in 94, well guess what its  sucks now.


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 29, 2012)

sactown024 said:


> *maybe i am being ignorant* or maybe its because I am younger and this is more attractive to the veteran photographers but i dont see whats so great about this, not my style...
> 
> Moon and Half Dome by Ansel Adams



I agree totally! You are a total noob, and yet you argue and then argue some more... with experienced people who are trying to help you! 

Guys.. I call it a waste of time and effort!


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Aug 29, 2012)

sactown024 said:


> art is suppose to be attractive to the eye



Please tell me more about what and how art is suppose to be. Please?


----------



## MTVision (Aug 29, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:
			
		

> Please tell me more about what and how art is suppose to be. Please?



Art is selective coloring, OOF, odd colored people, etc.  All that stuff people Like on FB. 

I kid. I kid.


----------



## Jaemie (Aug 29, 2012)

sactown024 said:


> ...maybe it was amazing for its time  period but so was the 1994 honda civic back in 94, well guess what its  sucks now.



 



I had a 94 Civic. But it drove more like Jeffrey Pine than Moon and Half Dome.


----------



## mjhoward (Aug 29, 2012)

'32 Ford's are still bad@ss


----------



## IByte (Aug 29, 2012)

mjhoward said:
			
		

> '32 Ford's are still bad@ss



71 cuda


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 29, 2012)

'69 Firebird with a tweaked pontiac 400, Munsey 4 speed, 4:11's and some good cheater slicks!


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 29, 2012)

1997 trans am LT1 with a 6 speed
1980 porsche 928, 5 speed


----------



## SCraig (Aug 29, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> '69 Firebird with a tweaked pontiac 400, Munsey 4 speed, 4:11's and some good cheater slicks!


Actually, it's Muncie.  Like the city in Indiana.  I had a '68 Z-28 Camaro with one.

This whole topic is a waste.  The guy is going to buy what he wants, he is then going to find out he doesn't like it and sell it.  I suspect the same scenario played out with that fisheye that he just sold, and it will play out over and over and over.  Sooner or later he'll realize that he isn't getting much better and switch to Nikon because the Canon stuff is obviously junk.

I'd recommend that he take that $90 and invest in a few books, an online photography course, or a membership in a local club but I'm sure that wouldn't fly either.

Photography is an expensive hobby.  Good bodies are expensive, good lenses are even more expensive.  People can choose to do one of two things: They can buy bottom-end gear and then replace it for better and then replace that for good, or they can buy the good stuff in the first place.  You have been given some excellent advice in this thread.  Whether or not you choose to take that advice is entirely up to you.


----------



## IByte (Aug 29, 2012)

SCraig said:
			
		

> Actually, it's Muncie.  Like the city in Indiana.  I had a '68 Z-28 Camaro with one.
> 
> This whole topic is a waste.  The guy is going to buy what he wants, he is then going to find out he doesn't like it and sell it.  I suspect the same scenario played out with that fisheye that he just sold, and it will play out over and over and over.  Sooner or later he'll realize that he isn't getting much better and switch to Nikon because the Canon stuff is obviously junk.
> 
> ...



Lol I just watch Adorama free TV and Googles put that money towards a nice ND filter...68 camaro man sploosh!


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 30, 2012)

SCraig said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > '69 Firebird with a tweaked pontiac 400, Munsey 4 speed, 4:11's and some good cheater slicks!
> ...



Actually I didnt go out and buy a fish eye lens, it came with the kit I bought, I have photography books, and took courses at C1M in NH,  usually not a good idea to jump to conclusions..... prime example of TPF "pros".


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 30, 2012)

sactown024 said:


> Actually I didnt go out and buy a fish eye lens, it came with the kit I bought, *I have photography books, and took courses at C1M in NH,  usually not a good idea to jump to conclusions.*.... *prime example of TPF "pros".*



Really?

Then why have you been asking so many really simple "beginner" questions????

Like:
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/digital-discussion-q/293466-kit-lens-useless.html?highlight=

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...80-what-format-quality-prints.html?highlight=

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...not-shooting-fast-enough-help.html?highlight=

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...ice-first-photo-shoot-weekend.html?highlight=

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...97-resizing-imagage-lightroom.html?highlight=

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/digital-discussion-q/296542-auto-focus-question.html?highlight=


These are the same questions we see from the people that picked up their camera at Best Buy last week! I would say the conclusions are pretty accurate! They definitely don't show knowledge gained from C1M courses!

And insulting every "TPF Pro" probably won't make you very popular here! What do you think?


----------



## pgriz (Aug 30, 2012)

Not all of us are "TPF pros". I am an amateur with about 40+ years experience. I am not a "Pro".  My photographic knowledge is very good in some areas, still poor in others. I buy equipment appropriate for what I do. But here's the thing. Photography is a wide-ranging and fairly complex activity. There are many specialty areas, and for certain things the right equipment is absolutely necessary. However, much of the knowledge and skills are transferrable from one area of photography to others. So among "serious" photographers, be they amateur or "pro", there is an emphasis on acquiring knowledge and skills because we've learned that those often trump equipment (except for some specialized situations). We have also learned along the way that "awareness of" and "knowledge of" something is just the starting point towards "understanding of" and "mastery of" the techniques and skills. And the distance between the two points is often measured in years, and hundreds of hours of practice.

As for jumping to conclusions - our postings allow others to develop an idea of what a person is capable of and what they know. If someone claimed to know electrical work, and then asked the question what's a #8 wire, that individual would be communicating very clearly their ignorance of basic electrical practice. Your questions, and your emphasis on certain aspects, communicate to us your knowledge and awareness, and even though you may think some are jumping to conclusions, the conclusions come out of the questions that are asked. Give credit to the more experienced photographers for recognizing the state of your knowledge as expressed by the questions you ask. People are here to share in an activity that we all love. We love to pass on what has worked for us, and what has not. But to tap into that knowledge, it helps to be humble, and to at least acknowledge the information being freely shared with you.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 30, 2012)

sactown024 said:


> SCraig said:
> 
> 
> > cgipson1 said:
> ...



I am beginning to think helping is a waste. Your desire to know everything is great, but your desire to LEARN everything isn't. You want to jump from A to Z stopping only where you feel like it in between-then only to give back attitude and childish behavior to those who do attempt to help you. 

We jumped to conclusions from your elementary questions and images. They speak for themselves.


----------



## SCraig (Aug 30, 2012)

sactown024 said:


> Actually I didnt go out and buy a fish eye lens, it came with the kit I bought, I have photography books, and took courses at C1M in NH,  usually not a good idea to jump to conclusions..... prime example of TPF "pros".



As I said, you've been given some good advice and whether or not you choose to take advantage of it is entirely up to you.  You persist in trying to run before you know the basics of walking, but that is also your choice.  For every person who does well as a photographer there are several thousand that fail, and in the majority of the cases the reason is exactly the track you are taking.

However I will do as you wish.  Henceforth where you are concerned I'll keep my conclusions and advice to myself.


----------



## pgriz (Aug 30, 2012)

You're also a new dad.  The learning curve there is far steeper than anything involved with photography.  As a person with several grown "kids" and starting on the next generation, I can tell you that had I had the wisdom and patience to listen to my parents and grandparents, I would have had a much easier time of being a father.  Well, maybe not easier, but certainly able to make better choices.  But the arrogance of youth tells us that the older ones have nothing new to teach as we are in a whole new world.  Later, much later, do we begin to understand that while the surface may be shiny and new, the underlying structure of how human live, learn, and act changes very slowly.  At this point in your life, learning to be a good father to your new child, and to be a good husband to your wife while still fulfilling your other obligations, is probably going to keep you very busy.  Having a child changes everything.  Having a second child changes everything again.  And the really hard part about this is that each new parent has to relearn the skills and knowledge that other parents had to learn.  Having good role models is an absolute blessing, but unfortunately most parents have flaws (they are human after all), and therefore one of the jobs of new parents is to pick up the "good" advice and ignore the "bad" advice.  It's not easy.  But it can be done, and most of us have, to a greater or lesser degree.


----------



## sactown024 (Aug 30, 2012)

okay well thanks for everyone's advice, although this entire time has been an argument ill still take something from it.


----------



## zcar21 (Aug 30, 2012)

It's not worth it, I saw that lens on ebay for $225. USM is nice, but the lens is not any better than the kit lens according to the reviews I've read.


----------

