Kit lenses (Page 3): Most times the term 'kit' lens applies to the lenses at the bottom end of the price range for crop sensor DSLR's, including those packaged with the camera for...

DaveHam Loc: Reading UK

Most times the term 'kit' lens applies to the lenses at the bottom end of the price range for crop sensor DSLR's, including those packaged with the camera for sale. In the Nikon range the term covers lenses like the 18-300.

The kit lenses have a lower build quality compared to the considerably more costly pro lenses, making use of a lot more composite optics and light weight construction material.

They are not all bad; the kit term should never mean poor quality, rather a cheaper alternative for those who do not want to invest in the pro quality.

Overall kit lens image quality may be less than the pro - you would expect that - but they do still work well and produce fine images.

Crwiwy Loc: Devon UK

graybeard wrote:

I see a lot of references to "Kit" lenses, often with an inference that they are in someway inferior. Can anyone shed any light on this? Thanks

Saw a test on the Canon 18 ~ 55mm STM lens from one of the big magazines and their conclusion was that to better it - even very slightly - you would need to pay 3 - 4 x the price!

I have also seen lectures by good pro photographers who were not too proud to use kit lens at times.

Your biggest limitation with a lower price lens is the aperture and therefore greater depth of field. If you do not need a very shallow depth of field or spend most of your time shooting at f8. then you probably wouldn't notice the difference - except in weight saving and compactness.

How many people spend thousands on a lens and then keep a Polarizer filter on it all the time thus reducing its effective aperture by 2 stops?

So many people seem to think that spending thousands of dollars on pro equipment will make them a good photographer or make them look good.

https://fstoppers.com/post-production/why-your-gear-might-be-holding-you-back-being-better-photographer-2907

and Your Camera Doesn't Matter
© 2013 Ken Rockwell
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm

A true Pro will create superb images with ANY camera! Check out some of the Pro challenges on YouTube.

Brian45 Loc: Melbourne, Australia

graybeard wrote:

I have shot over 1,000 pix so far, don't even know which one I used. I still haven't downloaded any of them.

Did you shoot them with a kit lens?

tomeveritt Loc: Fla. + Ga,NY,Va,Md,SC

Good Morning (in hiding) Graybeard

Most Nikon owners don't make "Condescending" remarks about Canon owners. The majority of Nikon owners do not join in with the daily Put Downs of Jpegs, Idiots not shooting Raw, Nikon vs Canon, show me yours so I can criticize it, etc.

UHH has a minimum of Braggers and Judges compared to other blogs, this is almost the only blog I even follow.

Some of the advice on UHH is expert help and experience offered by semi and working Professionals. Have a nice day 8-)

Jim Bob

St3v3M wrote:

Amen!

Well actually, it's mostly the photographer's eye, but the camera/lens does matter. With that said, I've seen some very arresting images from a cell phone camera. A good photographer can produce appealing images with a cheap camera. But give him/her a great camera and the images become exceptional.

Jim Bob

tomeveritt wrote:

Good Morning (in hiding) Graybeard br br Most Nik... (show quote)

Interesting observations about the HOG site. I beg to differ with your sweeping conclusions.

DaveHam Loc: Reading UK

Jim Bob wrote:

Well actually, it's mostly the photographer's eye, but the camera/lens does matter. With that said, I've seen some very arresting images from a cell phone camera. A good photographer can produce appealing images with a cheap camera. But give him/her a great camera and the images become exceptional.

It does rather depend on what you want to do with the image. For publication in a magazine type of thing the camera and the lens matter enormously. For publication on the web where image quality does not matter anything like as much you are right, almost anything will do.

For personal use I guess it is up to you to set your own criteria.

WessoJPEG Loc: Cincinnati, Ohio

Crwiwy wrote:

Saw a test on the Canon 18 ~ 55mm STM lens from on... (show quote)

Thanks for your info, I love Ken Rockwells articles, I feel the same as you do.

tomeveritt Loc: Fla. + Ga,NY,Va,Md,SC

You are so right St3v3M, all the shots on my website were processed at the CVS around the corner..

Normal advice from the Raw afficionados, maybe I'll try another drugstore. :roll:

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I think camera companies have a problem with names. Look at some of the names they attach to bodies and lenses. Calling something a "kit lens" is the kiss of death. Some so-called kit lenses are very good, while others are less good. When a new body is introduced, camera makers often introduce a new lens to sell with it. That doesn't mean the lens is "cheap."

I read lots of reviews and comparisons before buying a lens.

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

Like kit lenses mainly for travel. My old 50/1.8 is still a great option for low light use.

WessoJPEG Loc: Cincinnati, Ohio

sirlensalot wrote:

Like kit lenses mainly for travel. My old 50/1.8 is still a great option for low light use.

I love my cheap kit lenses

Don Fischer Loc: Antelope, Ore

I can't remember what I got with my D70 but I did turn down the kit lena. 18-55 wasn't going to do it for me. Come to think of it, maybe I didn't get a lens at all with it. I have a number of them from film! It's not that the kit is no good but the 18-55 just wouldn't do it for me. When I got the D5000 I turned down the kit lens there to, went with the 18-1105, D90 kit lens! lol I'd like to have some of the expensive lens but this is mostly hobby for me and I live on social security, I can't justify the cost of an expensive one. I used to think that I needed a 80-200 2.8. But somewhere along the road got a 70-300 Sigma and it's done well for me. the title kit lens doen't bother me, what it is can. What does anyone use an 18-55 for any way? Oh, I like metal mounts but the plastic one's don't bother me a bit.

Dana C Loc: Buhl, Idaho

Hear, hear. I have had a Nikkor 18-135 and now an 18-140. They were or are kit lenses and guess what. Neither they or a few other kit lenses has ever received a negative review that I could find. IHMO most kit lenses help produce great pictures assuming the person pushing the shutter button does what he / she needs to do.

WessoJPEG Loc: Cincinnati, Ohio

Dana C wrote:

Hear, hear. I have had a Nikkor 18-135 and now an 18-140. They were or are kit lenses and guess what. Neither they or a few other kit lenses has ever received a negative review that I could find. IHMO most kit lenses help produce great pictures assuming the person pushing the shutter button does what he / she needs to do.

Thanks Dana, you are right.