How bad is a "kit" lens.

barratt1988 said:
This all depends on what your into. F2.8 is pointless as my work horse lens at 80% of the time mines set to f11.
Click to expand...

:thinking:

The point of having an f2.8 lens isnt that you actually keep the aperture set to f2.8 (although that can be handy) - the point is that it lets in far more light before the lens stops down so focussing works better and its easier to use in low light situations

also most f2.8 lenses are built for pro use and thus the build quality is better and the glass is of higher quality than a kit lens
 
big soft moose said:
:thinking:

The point of having an f2.8 lens isnt that you actually keep the aperture set to f2.8 (although that can be handy) - the point is that it lets in far more light before the lens stops down so focussing works better and its easier to use in low light situations

also most f2.8 lenses are built for pro use and thus the build quality is better and the glass is of higher quality than a kit lens
Click to expand...

You can get an f4 of the same quality for far less in most cases. And again auto focus is dependent on the body and needs
 
barratt1988 said:
You can get an f4 of the same quality for far less in most cases. And again auto focus is dependent on the body and needs
Click to expand...

yes and no

the ammount of light AF needs depends on your body certainly - but the chances of getting that much light in are better with an f2.8 lens than they are with an f4 or f5.6

Pro's dont use big heavy f2.8 lenses for fun
 
Cagey75 said:
Who said the kit lens was bad?

and it just felt like it would fall apart after a slight bang. I got a Tamron 17-50 2.8 for very cheap, and it delivered much more. I immediately noticed the difference in image quality, bokeh, sharpness ... the tamron isn't a tank, but it sure feels healthier then a kit lens.
Click to expand...

The above might be true of the VC version of the Tamron, but the nonVC is actually far more likely to fall apart from heavy use than either the Canon IS or Nikon kit lens.

It's a poor design, and I've seen a number of reports of the whole front element falling out because of the bad design where 3 very small screws screw into a plastic band to secure the front element.

The non VC might be good optically, but build quality and materials aren't really a pro point for it.
 
big soft moose said:
yes and no

the ammount of light AF needs depends on your body certainly - but the chances of getting that much light in are better with an f2.8 lens than they are with an f4 or f5.6

Pro's dont use big heavy f2.8 lenses for fun
Click to expand...

The number 1 canon lens for landscape as voted by pros is the 17-40 f4. Landscape photographers dont rave about AF. Besides alot of the time your in manual.
 
I used the 18-55mm (non-IS) lens since I bought the camera around 2011. I only upgraded to a 18-135mm IS lens this year. Although I like this lens, I don't like how the lens creeps forward if you're holding the camera downwards.

If the kit lens was supplied with IS, I would have stayed with that lens.
 
Dael_Pix said:
I used the 18-55mm (non-IS) lens since I bought the camera around 2011. I only upgraded to a 18-135mm IS lens this year. Although I like this lens, I don't like how the lens creeps forward if you're holding the camera downwards.

If the kit lens was supplied with IS, I would have stayed with that lens.
Click to expand...

Not 100% sure but check down the L/H side of you 18-135mm IS lens there may be a small switch there to stop lens creep, I have the STM version and that one has this feature.
 
Nope it doesn't have it
 
Dave1 said:
The kit lens has had IS for over 6 years :shrug:
Click to expand...

Hi Dave

Seems hit and miss whether the kit lens has IS or not.

The one I got way way back when the 300D came out was non-IS, as was the one you flogged me ;-) So definite the changeover would match the 6 year time point you mention. That said my brother bought a 500D a couple of years back which was suppled with a non-IS lens.

I got a very tidy 20D with a spotless MK II IS kit lens for £90 off Gumtree last month. So def not an original with the camrra. I have always puzzled over how the release track of the IS versions were undertaken..

The IS version is a very nice runabout lens. Albeit in comparison with the non-IS verdion only!

Strve
 
Last edited:
Hugh Jarse said:
Hi Dave

Seems hit and miss whether the kit lens has IS or not.

The one I got way way back when the 300D came out was non-IS, as was the one you flogged me ;-) So definite the changeover would match the 6 year time point you mention. That said my brother bought a 500D a couple of years back which was suppled with a non-IS lens.

I got a very tidy 20D with a spotless MK II IS kit lens for £90 off Gumtree last month. So def not an original with the camrra. I have always puzzled over how the release track of the IS versions were undertaken..

The IS version is a very nice runabout lens. Albeit in comparison with the non-IS verdion only!

Strve
Click to expand...

The 300D, 350D, 400D, 20D and 30D would have come with the original non IS (not all the good lens), the 40D was the first body to come with the IS version.

Every body since then has come with the IS lens, so 450D, 500D, 550D, 600D, 650D. The 700D and 100D come with the newer STM IS lens.

The xxxD models often came with a version of the IS lens, but sans IS, and some more enterprising retailers made up kits of the 500D/550D/600D with the nonIS version of the IS lens (described as the 18-55 DC). This lens has the same optical quality as the IS lens, it is actually the same lens optically, just the IS module is removed.

Basically, nonIS from more than 6 years ago was poor, the IS and nonIS (that looks like the IS) sold in the last 6 years are both good optically.
 
Dave1 said:
The 300D, 350D, 400D, 20D and 30D would have come with the original non IS (not all the good lens), the 40D was the first body to come with the IS version.

Every body since then has come with the IS lens, so 450D, 500D, 550D, 600D, 650D. The 700D and 100D come with the newer STM IS lens.

The xxxD models often came with a version of the IS lens, but sans IS, and some more enterprising retailers made up kits of the 500D/550D/600D with the nonIS version of the IS lens (described as the 18-55 DC). This lens has the same optical quality as the IS lens, it is actually the same lens optically, just the IS module is removed.

Basically, nonIS from more than 6 years ago was poor, the IS and nonIS (that looks like the IS) sold in the last 6 years are both good optically.
Click to expand...

As ever Dave you are a font of knowledge!

it is all a nightmare for many. I am actually shootong more film these days rather than digital. None but my EF lenses work on my EOS 5, 50E and 3000v.... As you will know its almost impossible to get an ef-s mounted on a 35mm camera.

Steve
 
Dave1 said:
Basically, nonIS from more than 6 years ago was poor, ...........
Click to expand...

No it isn't, I've had some excellent shots with it on my old 350D. This is a crop from such a shot, you can see the hairs on the chin, do butterflies have chins?

Img_3049c.jpg
 
I use the kit lens all the time, the only reason I upgraded was for the 2.8 and faster.

Never had any issues with the sharpness etc
 
artyman said:
No it isn't, I've had some excellent shots with it on my old 350D. This is a crop from such a shot, you can see the hairs on the chin, do butterflies have chins?

Img_3049c.jpg
Click to expand...

While you might not think so, I doubt you will find many reviews agreeing with you.

When compared to the IS version that came out 6 years ago the previous nonIS version is poor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top