Just Got a T3, very excited.

[speedy2]

Sounds like you rely on your zooms a lot. Some people prefer primes and do great with them. That's why the 50mm f/1.8 is a good choice. You can see just how much you can do with a prime without spending a lot. Usually, when you compare even the 50mm f/1.8 to the kit lens that comes with a Rebel, you get blown away. For most, the kit lens, a 50mm, and maybe a UWA is about all someone would need to tinker with DSLR photography. If they're more into sports, maybe a fast 70-200mm.

I had a Canon 10-22mm, Sigma 70-200mm f2/.8, Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm, Canon 50mm f/1.8.......All on a Rebel XT. I loved all those lenses. They all had their uses. And, I don't think I could live with just one and one alone.

 

[swanysto]

I love my primes, but they do have limitations. Here's some examples:

This was shot with my 28mm f/2.8 prime: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/805866/DSC02543.JPG

I feel that the perspective on this was great, if I had the 50mm on it, I'd lose the rocks on the beach and there would be less off the clouds for the HDR effect. Using my tele (70-210mm) would have resulted in an even shorter area, all water and clouds.

This was shot with my 50mm f/1.7 prime: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/805866/DSC03212.JPG

Again, I feel this is framed perfectly, and shooting at f/2 let me get the foreground bokeh from the flowers and bushes while focusing on the sunset.

But where do your zoom lenses come in handy? The above photos are from Hawaii last week when we went for a wedding - the groom hired like 8 photogs for photo and video, but I decided to get in on the action while they had them posing. Couldn't use flash in the church, but this is me standing at the same distance using my 70-210mm f/4 lens.

@200mm f/4 - http://dl.dropbox.com/u/805866/DSC03006.JPG
@75mm f/4 - http://dl.dropbox.com/u/805866/DSC03009.JPG

I left my EXIF data and all, but don't limit yourself. It's nice to play with the primes, I really like mine, but I would not have the other pics without my tele.

That beach shot was beautiful. I also like the 75mm better than the 200mm. The background and clarity make the second picture really cool.

 

[Gintaras]

It's still plastic but it's prime. So instead of 3.5-5 or whatever the kit lens is you can stop this thing down to 1.8. That's a lot more light. It's really nice for images at night if you're handholding and you can get some very nice depth of field too.

Walk around with your kit lens at 35 for like a week and 50 for a week and see which one you prefer. Don't just arbitrarily pick.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7_wL0ZZi6k

 

[randomrogue]

Cool video

 

[swanysto]

Well, i am getting a grasp of this stuff. It is definitely amazing how a little photoshop can make a bad photographer look a little better.

Before:
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g181/swanysto/IMG_0316.jpg

After:
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g181/swanysto/IMG_0316copy.jpg

 

[dougp]

It is better to overexpose than underexpose a photo.

 

[swanysto]

It is better to overexpose than underexpose a photo.

How do I overexpose with the camera? I want to come out with more vibrant pictures. Everything seems to come out clear, but dull in color. I have messed around with a lot of settings and light options, but haven't really gotten what I am looking for.