Looking to move into the dSLR world

NTP66

New member
I currently have a Canon PowerShot G11, which has served me well, but I'm now looking to make the leap into an entry-level dSLR. Ideally, this would become my main camera for just about everything - mainly, landscapes, wildlife (note: stills more than action shots), and family photos.

While I'm not too concerned with price, I'm trying to be reasonable with how much I spend here, realizing that this is nothing more than a hobby for me, and that my wife would probably strangle me if she knew how much I'm about to spend on a camera/lens. :)

That being said, one of the biggest factors for me is finding a great "all-around" lens, one that's versatile enough to handle most of what I would normally use it for (see above). The two lenses that I continue to read about, with all of that in mind, are the Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S and the Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM. I'd probably add a 35mm prime lens down the line, too. Anyone have any suggestions for their walk around lens of choice?

FWIW - and I know this partially ignores the advice in the stickies - I've basically narrowed my choice of body to the Canon EOS 700D/T5i or the Nikon D5200. I still need to get both in my hands to see how they feel, but figured I could ask about the lenses beforehand.
 
The lenses you listed are pretty useless for wildlife. You will need a longer lens for that. I have the tamron pzd 18-270mm and it is one of the best all around lenses out there. And it won't break the bank. The 18mm is great for wide angle, landscapes, etc... And the 270 isn't ideal for wildlife,but definitely adequate.
 
Sorry, I should have been a little more specific. When I said wildlife, I really meant places like the zoo, aquarium, etc., where I'll be much closer and wouldn't need a superzoom.

That being said, am I looking at this the wrong way? I figured an all in one lens would be a smarter decision, rather than 2-3 lenses that each do something better than the other - especially for a novice. I was originally considering a lens in the 18-200 realm, but the reviews of that 16-85 that I mentioned swayed me in that direction.
 
Forgot to add, I'll be going with the Nikon D5200. I spent some time playing around with a bunch of models, and just like how the Nikon feels more. While the menu on my G11 is just average, I like it a hell of a lot more than the menus in the T4i and T5i.

One minor drawback to this decision is that I'll need to stick with AF-S lenses, as there is no motor in the D5200's body.
 
Going with a mid-range zoom is probably a good idea for your first lens. There is no great jack-of-all trades lens that will excel to any degree at both landscapes and wildlife. Even at zoos, I'm usually using my 70-200, but I'll often times have to break out the 300mm with 1.4x teleconverter. For landscapes, however, if I could only bring one lens, it would probably be my 24-70 on my 5DMII (many would probably want even a little wider). . .so with the crop factor on the D5200, that would be equivalent to a 16-45(ish)mm zoom. So, there may be a 16-200mm zoom out there, but I don't think any lens really covers a range that wide very well.

That said, I'm not a Nikon shooter, but here's a great website for very good lens reviews: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/. They focus a bit more on Canon, but it looks like they have pretty much the entire Nikon lens lineup as well as many third party lenses.
 
Last edited:
Well, I finally pulled the trigger, and picked up a D5200, a Nikon 35mm f/1.8G prime, and a Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G. I got everything for very reasonable prices. After way too much reading and procrastinating, I decided to just go with multiple lenses, which is where I would have ended up, anyway. I'm going to play around with this stuff before considering a longer zoom lens (x-200/300).
 
Sounds like a good setup! I have that same 35 1.8. Its a very nice lens. Tho with the 18-270, I rarely use it unless I'm going for a certain effect with awesome Bokeh.
 
Back
Top