My thanks to all who leave comments for my work and to those of you who like one enough to make it a favourite. To touch just one person that way makes each image worthwhile. . . . . . . . . .. . . . "The question is not what you look at, but what you see" ~ Marcel Proust
I totally agree with the 'get an inexpensive prime lens' one. A 'nifty fifty' is a great tool at an amazingly low price.
One suggestion I have for women is to get a purse/camera bag combo (Jo Totes, Epiphanie, and a bunch of other companies are now making them). It's a big help to always have the camera available since you never know when a great shot will appear.
Coincidentally I had already been looking at one of those relatively cheap 50mm lens, but the idea of it being a 'gateway' lens is unsettling. Are more expensive lenses better, or do we just think they are better?
A cheap lens can make a good camera very average. An expensive lens cannot make a cheap camera good. Match the lens to the body and spend what it takes to get a good image. The best way is to look on the net to get comparisons of lenses.
Tootles ~ Here is Ken Rockwell's review of Canon's 50mm f/1.8 lens (that sells for a whole $100). In his words, it has "Spectacular optics (better than most Canon lenses of any price)". The build quality isn't much, but the results really are stellar. I've read equally good things about Nikon's version.
CLICK