Kit Lenses

minibloke

minibloke

Messages
191
Name
Anthony
Edit My Images
Yes
I was just wondering how good the latest kit lenses really are.

I'm looking at getting my first DLSR as a step up from a Panasonic fz-18 bridge camera.
I enjoy close up pics of plants and bugs, but also motorsport and wildlife. but i'm still playing and enjoy most forms at the moment.

As a step up i'm looking at a budget of £800 and identified the following -

Canon 450D, 500D and 40D
Nikon D5000 and D90

I could get the 450D and better lenses, but still nothing major. Or do I look at the others with twin kit lenses (all around £800, except D90) and work out what I really like.

As i'm stepping up I would hope i'll notice a difference in IQ as even the kit lenses are bigger/better than the 46mm one on the FZ-18 (although it is a leica)
Any opinions welcome. I'm of out this weekend to look.
 
With today's cameras, buying the best quality glass you can afford is always the best idea as it is likely the lens will last longer than the camera, and the higher pixel counts put more demands on the lens quality. However, these can cost more than the camera so it is best to consider how big you will enlarge your photos (up to A4 and you probably won't see any difference) and what you actually want to achieve. If you buy Canon, switching from the kit 18-55mm to the 17-55mm f2.8 will see an increase in cost of about £600, but switching to the 17-85mm will only be about £250.
 
Go for the 450D over the 500D, unless you really have to have HD video recording. You'll save a fair bit.
Although, having gone for the 450D myself, I'd say go for the 40D, especially if you want to shoot motorsport as it has a quicker burst rate and larger buffer.

The 18-55 IS lens that comes with the 450 & 500 is light years ahead of the old 18-55 that was shipped with the 350D and 400D.

For wildlife and motorsport, you're going to want a much longer lens that those though. You can get the 70-200 F/4L for around £400, or the 70-300 IS USM for around £300 (both 2nd hand).
That would leave you £400 - £500 for a body, which may just cover a 40D.

Don't know much about the Nikon kit though.
 
I'm after a new general purpose lens and was deciding between the 17-55mm f/2.8 and the 24-70mm L (on a 1000D). I'm leaning towards the 17-55mm due to th ereview from digital picture.
 
For me, general purpose lens, the Canon 17-55 F2.8 IS is a great piece of kit. The focal length suits my cropped body really well - IMHO! There are good reviews of the 17-50 Tamron as well, and it's quite a few ££'s cheaper.
 
Thanks for the replies. the kit lenses with the canons are 18-55 is and 55-250 is. These seem to have a good range to start with.
I like the idea of the 40D as video doesn't bother me and the camera seems better made.
 
Sadly, none of the kit lenses (that I know of) will allow you to take proper close up pics of insects.
 
swag72 said:
For me, general purpose lens, the Canon 17-55 F2.8 IS is a great piece of kit. The focal length suits my cropped body really well - IMHO! There are good reviews of the 17-50 Tamron as well, and it's quite a few ££'s cheaper.
Click to expand...

What does the weight of the 17-55mm feel like on your cropped body? Heard the 17-55 is a bit of a brick, but one review said the 18-55mm kit lens did 90% of what the 17-55mm which I thought was odd considering it is pretty expensive.
 
It's one thing Nikon got right from the start. With the D70 you had the option of 2 kit lenses, one of which was the 18-70 f3.5-4G, a superb lens that you still see people on here keep hold of.
 
I've taken the plunge!
I finally (after nearly 2hrs in the shop) bit the bullet and got a s/h 40D and s/h 17-85mm lens, along with a Lowepro fastpack 100 backpack, hoya filter and 4Gb card and hit my budget dead on.
I managed to forsake the longer zoom lens, as I went with my dad, who has a 50D and agreed to 'lend' me his EF 100-300mm which he rarely uses.
Thanks for your advice, now i'd better learn to use it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top