Since I started writing my photography tip & tutorial posts I’ve started receiving emails and Facebook asking

“I want to buy a dSLR. Where do I go from here?”
or
“I have a dSLR but I want to get a different lens, what should I buy?”

My answer is always the same, that I think it’s best to buy down in body and up in lens. If this is going over your head already just remember that dSLR’s have two separate parts, the camera part, called a body, and the lens, and those are interchangeable. In my opinion it’s best to buy the nicest lens you can afford and plan on upgrading the body as needed, rather than buying the nicest body and upgrading the lens as needed. Sometimes though, I think people ignore my advice (which is fine, do what you want with your money and your photos) and get caught up in the megapixels and the nicer LCD screen, causing them to ignore the glass.

I knew that the best way to drive this point home was to demonstrate what a better lens can do for your photos, and I’m lucky enough to own the three lenses, low, medium, and high quality which I knew would be necessary to use in order to show you what I mean. Keep in mind throughout this post that each person needs to buy the lens that fits their needs, and for some people a prime/fixed lens is not going to work. My intent is just to demonstrate that unless you absolutely have to have it for whatever reason you dream up, the kit lens that comes with your camera is absolute crap.

Lens 1, Zoom Lens or “Kit Lens”, Low Quality
Focal Length: 28-135mm
Aperture: 3.5-5.6
Price: $374.95

Lens 2, Prime Lens or Fixed Lens, Medium-High Quality
Focal Length: 50mm
Aperture: 1.4
Price: $399.95

Lens 3, Prime Lens or Fixed Lens, High Quality, L Series
Focal Length: 50 mm
Aperture: 1.2
Price: $1349.95

From left to right, Lens 1, Lens 2, and Lens 3.

At my last hair appointment I crouched on the floor in my friend Jill’s sunroom and took some pictures of her darling little son. I was blown away by the difference I saw between the kit lens and the prime lenses and I think you will be as well. Not all of the photos were taken with the same camera settings, partly because the difference in quality doesn’t allow me to do so, and also because this post isn’t about certain settings, it’s about overall quality.

Above each photo you will see the shooting specs I used at the time the photo was taken. All photos were taken on the Manual setting, giving me absolute control over all of my images. Each photo is SOOC, which means it is Straight Out of The Camera, with absolutely no editing whatsoever, taken with the same camera body, my Canon 50D. I wanted to make sure you knew that Photoshop didn’t give me these pictures, my lens did!

First up, the kit lens that came with my Canon 50D when I bought it from Costco. If I could go back in time I would tell That Wife, before she was known as Jenna Cole, that buying the body+kit lens from Costco was a waste of money, even if it cost $100 less than it did on B&H. I can count on my hand the number of times I’ve used this lens in the last 5 months, and now that I’ve written this post I’d like to get rid of it as soon as possible.

The kit lens has a variable aperture (not sure if that is the right term), so when I zoom in and out the aperture changes automatically (even when I have the camera on Manual) which I find incredibly annoying and it makes shooting so much more difficult. I admire those who are shooting around this limitation while using their kit lens.

Okay, enough educating, let’s get to show-and-tell!

Lens 1
28mm
ISO 320
1/200
f/3.5

35mm
ISO 320
1/200
f/3.5

28mm
ISO 320
1/200
f/3.5

Get ready, because the difference between Lens 1 and Lens 2, lenses with only a $20 difference in price, is going to BLOW YOUR MIND.

Lens 2
50 mm
ISO 200
1/200
f/2.5

50mm
ISO 100
1/250
f/1.8

50mm
ISO 100
1/250
f/1.8

Are you still there? Or did you just drop down of shock? Because I almost did when I uploaded the photos and got the chance to really see what a good lens can do for the quality of photos. That being said, I was also surprised at how little difference there was between the photos taken with the 50mm 1.4 and the 50mm 1.2, even though there is a $950 difference in price. I’m still happy I own the 50mm 1.2, and I love it, but I’m happy to show so many of you that you don’t have to invest in a $1350 lens to take clear, crisp, colorful portraits.

Lens 3
50mm
ISO 320
1/200
f/2.5

I included this one because it makes me laugh. Babies can go from perfectly content to sobbing their eyes out and then back to perfectly content in 5 seconds flat.

50mm
ISO 100
1/320
f/1.2

50mm
ISO 100
1/320
f/1.2

50mm
ISO 100
1/320
f/1.2

50mm
ISO 100
1/320
f/1.2

Still not convinced? Thinking you just need to invest in Photoshop to “fix” your photos so you can keep using your kit lens? I brought my top three photos from each lens into Photoshop and did a few light edits for color and sharpness to help them pop a little bit more. I actually think I prefer the shot taken with the 50mm 1.2 ($400 lens) over the 50mm 1.2 shot ($1350 lens).

Lens 1

Lens 2

Lens 3

Is the $1350 lens an overpriced waste of money? I don’t think that this experiment necessarily proves that. I caught the shot below with my 50mm 1.2 set wide open on an aperture of 1.2, and I don’t think I could have grabbed this with my lower quality glass and smaller aperture 50mm 1.4. Maybe, but I’m not sure.

If you take away anything from this post I hope it will be “when investing in a dSLR, buy down in your body quality, and up in lens quality”.