Photography Questions

[Harvs82]

Hi All,

Just wondering if there is anyone on here that has an interest in photography and could help me out with a few things.

I'm looking at buying a few lenses for my current DSLR (Canon EOS300D) and I was wondering what you guys would recommend for a wide angle lens, as well as something thats suitable for taking good shots of cars etc. Basically I'm after a lens or two that will be suitable for landscapes / cityscapes / buildings etc, and then one that is suitable for other stuff like car photography. I'm wanting to ditch the crappy 18-55 kit lens and get some decent glass in front of the camera.

I'm also trying to blur the background in some of my shots, particularly behind the main object that I'm photographing, but I can never seem to get it to work properly... not sure where I'm going wrong.

If anyone can point me in the right direction I'd appreciate it.

Regards

Harvs82

[walesy]

your best bet would be to talk to minux about that he is a keen photographer and ive seen some of his pics! amazing stuff

[Bax]

Blur comes through depth of field, the lower the f stop the narrower the depth. f1.2 - f2.8 etc.

Blurred backgrounds also come from distance between the object and the background and the focal length.

I've got a 10-20mm as my wide angle. It's extremely wide.

As for the other lens, no doubt you'll get recommended a Canon 24-70L.

A 50mm prime would also be okay as well - primes are sharp. On the other hand I was looking at a lens for some car photography and a few guys recommended the 70-200 f/2.8 as the further you get away the more natural the shape and easier to get blurry backgrounds with sharper apertures.

[minux]

Until you can take good pictures with the kit lens, I wouldn't upgrade. I have sold quite a fe wprints with the kit lens, so dont diss it. Used right it can get very sharp images.

Best lens I can suggest for sheer quality for what you want to do is the 17-40 lens. Its wide enough on a crop body and super sharp. While the canon 10-22 is a good lens, it lacks the pure sharpness you get out of the 17-40, it is also an EF-S lens which means if you go a full frame camera it becomes useless. I actually had a side by side comparison of the 10-22 and 17-40, Same lens, same focal point, same aperture, same exposure shot at the same time, the difference across the lens points was amazing.

I am looking to buy either the 24-70 or 24-105 next to match up with my 70-200f2.8IS and 17-40. All great lenses.

Most importantly, what is your budget?


(I will merge this thread later)