Looking for design inspiration?   Browse our curated collections!

Return to Main Discussion Page
Discussion Quote Icon

Discussion

Main Menu | Search Discussions

Search Discussions
 
 

Hiren Patel

8 Years Ago

Top 5 Lenses That Beginner Photographers Can Get On A Budget

There is a list of five budget lenses that will serve you well in your first years as a photographer.

https://www.photographytalk.com/photography-articles/5821-top-5-lenses-that-beginner-photographers-can-get-on-a-budget

Reply Order

Post Reply
 

Dan Carmichael

8 Years Ago

I am going to disagree. I did not look at all lenses in the article, only one lens:
Tamron 16-300mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD

Here is what two professional reviews stated:


weak image quality at the maximum relative aperture and on the edge of the frame for all focal lengths
huge level of lateral chromatic aberration in the focal range from 200 to 300 mm,
high distortion at wide angles of view.

and



Reduced sharpness at longer focal lengths, especially at the edges
Slow maximum apertures
Autofocus less reliable towards long end of the zoom
Plentiful chromatic aberration, prodigious at 200-300mm
Strong distortion throughout, both barrel and pincushion
'Focus breathing' reduces focal length at close range

But there's a fairly long list of downsides too, with image quality at longer focal lengths being perhaps at the top. Sharpness is very high at the wide end when stopped down a little, right across the frame, and that's great for landscapes. At F8, high edge-to-edge sharpness is available up to 100mm or so, but then there's a notable downturn with the edges in particular taking a hit. From 200-300mm, edge sharpness is never very good, not helped by the plentiful levels of chromatic aberration present, but to be fair it stays crisp in the centre. It looks as if Tamron has prioritized central sharpness, on the basis that this is most likely where the main subject will be at longer settings - and as a very rough generalization, that's probably true.



And that's the problem. A lens with (apparently) horrendous chromatic aberration, strong distortion throughout the focal range, edge weakness and so forth being labeled as one of the "top 5 lenses" would make me distrustful of the entire article. But... just my opinion.

 

Edward Fielding

8 Years Ago

Hiren please upload some recent photos taken with these lenses.

 

Richard Reeve

8 Years Ago

Then there's always the "one lens for a year" philosophy (usually a prime) ;-)

I think this discussion could run for a long time...

- Richard Reeve
ReevePhotos.com

 

Edward Fielding

8 Years Ago

Best lens for a beginner would be a standard, reliable 50 mm. But what fun is that for the manufacturers and the websites selling advertising?

 

Dan Carmichael

8 Years Ago

But Edward, foot zooming is good exercise !

 

Edward Fielding

8 Years Ago

I agree. Much better to learn with a prime and actually move around ones environment rather than stand in place and zoom-zoom.

What a weird list. Large range of lens. If I was a beginner I'd be totally confused.

This is why these hack sites concentrate on "advice" for beginners. They figure the reader won't know the difference. They also concentrate on equipment because its a lot harder to teach people the art of photography. Selling equipment is easy.

 

Jane McIlroy

8 Years Ago

I don't think they're really interested in giving advice anyway, as long as they can make money from pay-per-click advertising.

 

Mark Papke

8 Years Ago

Haven't used the 18-35 but the reviews are stellar. The 16-28 is an awesome lens. A little soft wide open, otherwise one of the sharpest lenses I've ever used. Don't know anything about the others. The Sigma 24-105 f/4 is another great all around lens if you can get your hands on one. I have read it has been discontinued for some reason.

 

Edward Fielding

8 Years Ago

Isn't this just spam when some creates an account for the sole purpose of posting ads and never participating in the forum?

 

Roberto Ferrero

8 Years Ago

I will not go into the quality of the optics do not know why.
But from my point of view, in a generic photo, the 5 favorite lenses are the 20mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm.

They may seem to focus too closely, but the other one is the alternative. This will preserve the more natural perspective, or likely, eye. ( 20mm apart :)) )

And you can do everything, except for the photo hunting.

 

Dan Carmichael

8 Years Ago

@Jane
"I don't think they're really interested in giving advice anyway, as long as they can make money from pay-per-click advertising."

Valid point. Writing an article: "Expensive, yes, but the best quality optics / lenses you can buy" won't get too many clicks. Catering to the lowest common denominator does.


@Edward
"Isn't this just spam when some creates an account for the sole purpose of posting ads and never participating in the forum?"

Probably true, but irrelevant. FAA has already commented on this and the official FAA position is that the poster and articles are as welcome here as any other. That's why commenting about the poster is useless. About the only tactic left is to comment about the subject, and diminish the value / authority / usefulness of the posted article if applicable.

 

Edward Fielding

8 Years Ago

I guess but adding to this thread just validates the advertisement at the top. It would be better to ignore this thread and start a new one.

 

Dan Carmichael

8 Years Ago

Open to interpretation.

Let's say you have two threads:

Thread 1
Is an article about the best cameras for under $100 and a link

Thread 2
Is an article about the best cameras for under $100 and a link but a whole bunch of posts following that about how wrong the article is, how bad the information is, and so forth.

Which article in which thread will be clicked on least?

 

This discussion is closed.