Hey,

So Im currently using a Canon EOS DSLR 700D with its standard lens (18-55mm EFS STM).

Im thinking of selling it and get a new lens.

Usage;
-Landscape
-Portrait (Single and group)

Please help recommend me a BANG-4-BUCKS lens,
Below RM800 (Or within that range so I can buy a 2nd hand)

keep that lens, it's good and will be helpful if ever you decide to sell off the camera body.

for sub RM 800, I recommend the 40mm f2.8 STM.

50mm f1.8, kit lens

Portrait sure you'll need prime lens, 50mm 1.8 not bad.
For landscape, wide angle lens will be good. But can start with kit lens first.

This post has been edited by supersound: Oct 31 2014, 03:31 PM

yeap keep the kit lens, it doesn't worth much even if you sell it, furthermore the STM is really lovely.

40mm is around 500-600 right?

Doesn't need prime lens for portrait, any lens can shoot portrait. there's full body, half body and so on, sometimes you need wide angle too.

I would recommend TS something like the tamron 17-50, you get wide angle, you get mid telephoto, you get f2.8, you get good IQ.

The bokeh yield are not zoom lens can do
Just before someone says skill are more important, I would point out that why the pros never keep their kit lens and get FX with expensive lens?
Not to stir out a debate on this, just a point we should think of.

This post has been edited by supersound: Oct 31 2014, 03:45 PM

The flat portrait shots with bokeh are well achieved with telephoto zoom lenses.
The in depth portrait with a sharp background are well achieved with ultra wide angles lenses.
Its about what kind of picture do you really want and learn how to get that look.

And there are more reasons to why pros get the best gears than just image quality and bokehs. Built like a tank that can take a beating, Weather sealing, super fast AF, full time manual focus, better colors, flare control etc. But if you chase for the best of everything you'll probably go bankrupt. Know what you really really want before you make an expensive upgrade that will just sit in a drybox.

For lens recommendation is probably get a prime lens, telephoto lens and an UWA to explore and cover most fields.
Your first prime lens: Canon 50mm F1.8 or 40mm F2.8.
Your first telephoto lens: Canon 55-250mm IS
Your first UWA lens: Canon 10-18mm

Then you have focal range coverage of 10-250mm and one lens that have wide aperture. And each lens does do a different job so you'll learn its role to your photography. But its good to explore different fields.

The next upgrades will be tripods and flash guns, but that also depends on what you want to do.

FYI its been said that the 18-55 kit lens is as sharp as an L lens at F8.0 aperture. So don't underestimate what image quality you can bring out of the kit lens.

This post has been edited by Rice_Owl84: Oct 31 2014, 07:07 PM

Not saying you are wrong but,

Bokeh portrait = good? yes at some, no at some too.

it's not that easy to create really quality bokeh portrait, unless you are one of those who just go "URGHHHH" when looking at the bokeh of background instead of the person's lighting/ posing/ expression and such.

Pros, yes, they have top quality gear (most of them, it's a tool anyways), that's because they CHARGE for each photo shoot, they have the money and the need for top quality gear.

Is TS a professional? no. we shouldn't always take Pro gear into consideration when most of us just take photos for our own pleasure, instead of working for client.

Professional because they can produce quality pictures that worth money, not because the gears they use.

Each lens have their own purpose. If 1 lens can suit all, then why Nikon and Canon keep on introducing new lens?
Before exploring more lens, getting a flash will be better.
At F8, it can't perform well under low light environment, so with the help of flash are important on this case. But on bright daylight, it is ok with F8.

Personal taste are subjective, so no right or wrong(like you said)
But with a fast prime lens that suit TS's budget, why not? I'm pretty sure 50mm 1.8 are at our bag

Photos are not only about bokeh.

Expensive lenses do not guarantee good pictures. The main reason why most experienced photography enthusiast do not use the kit lens is because they have come to know what lens they need.

For TS, I would suggest you shoot with your kit lens until you know what lens to get next. Don't just ditch the kit lens because you don't want to use it. Until you know what lens to get next, don't bother going shopping as it would just be a waste of time and money. There are lots of lenses out there and no one needs all those lenses. Find out what you need before you go shopping.

Because all of them know the limitations on the kit lens.
And yeah, now you can say bokeh are nothing, but all the portrait photos that being shared here or other forums are full of bokeh, some even over do on post processing. But no one comment on this. Instead, saying good bokeh
That's why I always take the famous people's review at a pinch of salt. In front of the world they are talking about skill matters, but they are only using the expensive lens, quite contradicting on their statements.
Before 1 would say bokeh are nothing, check back his camera bag does he has a prime lens or not

Yes, they know the limitations of the kit lens and how do they know that?

I did not say bokeh is nothing. I said it is NOT everything. And yes a lot of people do like bokeh and some even drool over bad bokeh but even if a picture has good bokeh but bad composition and subject, even the greatest lens in the universe can't help. Let me give you an example:

A picture of a lens cap in perfect focus and great bokeh but the lens cap is cut off on top and poorly lighted. How's that a good photo?

Expensive gears DO NOT equal quality pictures. Expensive gears can also produce horrible pictures. The skills being referred to is skills in composition, lighting and capturing the moments. They use expensive gears because those gears maximizes the chance they have to take great pictures.

Here's a analogy for the case: Would you prefer to have your appendix removed by a skilled surgeon with a kitchen knife or by a pharmacist with a precision surgery blade?

Well, I'm not here to start a fight, just to point out something that we are contradicting our self
Does a 50mm 1.8 considered as expensive gear?
And your last analogy makes no sense at all.

It's because if you can afford better equipment, then why should there be a reason not to get them?

In the end, the general understanding is that you can't buy technique and skill with equipment. Just like if I buy you the best canvas and brush, it won't make you a pro artist right?

You seem to think that expensive gears = good pictures ?

Bokeh is not everything neither is it nothing. Get it?

I have never purchased a lens based on bokeh quality. It's mainly focal length, aperture stop, sharpness, size/weight, distortion and so on

50mm f/1.8 is not expensive at all if you compare it with other prime lenses, one of the cheapest actually...

Well... If you are rich, buy all the expensive gears. If not, get what you can.

Pros say like that because they have the skill to backup. Most pro out there started with cheap gears then slowly upgrade as they found limitations.

The 50mm is cheap and expensive. Why? Its cheap for the aperture, sharpness and the price. Expensive for those who can't afford it and don't need it.

We should wait for ts to reply instead of wasting time arguing. If he doesn't reply then no need for more in depth discussion.

Define "pro", even "pro" always says skill matters, but they never use kit lens.

How is my analogy making no sense? The surgeon has skills and uses cheap equipment. The pharmacist has a little medical knowledge and uses premium or as you like to put it, expensive equipment. If expensive gears = quality then you would have no problems being operated on by the pharmacist, right? Clearly, that would not be your choice because you know skills matter more than expensive equipment.

It's not that pros never use kit lens. It's because when they were using the kit lens, they were not pros yet but they gradually came to learn about the limitations of the kit lens and found out what they need. They then bought what they needed and used that. Similar to my analogy, a pro could use a kit lens and produce much better results than a beginner using a premium equipment.

That is why I always tell people asking question like 'what lens to get after the kit lens' to shoot more with the kit lens. If you have shot enough with the kit lens, you won't be asking that question any more because you would already know the answer.

So let me ask you a question : Why are you so against 'pros' using premium equipment? Do you think they are cheating just because they use more expensive gears?

arrr.... person who can earn money from their skills?

Again, do you actually knows what kit lens means? A 24-70 can be a kit lens, a 18-55 can be a kit lens, a 35 f1.4 can be a kit lens, so?

Lets say photographer no.1 uses a Canon 85mm f1.8, it's not a kit lens. another photographer can use a Canon 85mm f1.2. Both of them get paid by client for pictures, what do you think?

You should learn to accept people's opinions when you want people to accept you.

When situation need to use normal knife, he has to use it.
A pharmacist also have to follow what a doctor has to study, only they never study further. So what a doctor can do, a pharmacist can do.
I never against the "pros", I only want to know in front of newbies talk A, then in actual they are talking B. Never being consistent on what they are doing.

Then you shall show me a DSLR when we buy come together with 24-70mm F2.8, in white box.