The use of kit lenses.
May 12, 2016 10:37:21 #
Many cameras come with so called kit lenses. Quality of kit lenses vary but in general I would say that they are very good as first lens choices. I have used Nikon kit lenses and the quality of the images have been very acceptable.
In the M43, mirrorless arena there are also many kit lenses that do their job. I would say that these lenses perform very well when we do our part.
As we continue to learn to photograph then the necessity is felt to get better lenses and those kit lenses serve us as an indication of which focal lengths are going to be used more often in our photography, a good indication of which lenses we should buy.
These images are only samples of what kit lenses can do and I posted some of these a couple of years back when I visited Tarpon Springs here in Florida but mostly in colors. The difference now is that they have been edited using Nik Silver Efex Pro 2. The camera is the Olympus EP-5 and the lens is the Panasonic 14-45 f3.5-5.6 which seems to me to yield better results in the middle of the aperture range than the Olympus 14-42 f3.5-5.6.
The first two images have an Orton Effect applied which obviously has nothing to do with the kit lenses.
In the M43, mirrorless arena there are also many kit lenses that do their job. I would say that these lenses perform very well when we do our part.
As we continue to learn to photograph then the necessity is felt to get better lenses and those kit lenses serve us as an indication of which focal lengths are going to be used more often in our photography, a good indication of which lenses we should buy.
These images are only samples of what kit lenses can do and I posted some of these a couple of years back when I visited Tarpon Springs here in Florida but mostly in colors. The difference now is that they have been edited using Nik Silver Efex Pro 2. The camera is the Olympus EP-5 and the lens is the Panasonic 14-45 f3.5-5.6 which seems to me to yield better results in the middle of the aperture range than the Olympus 14-42 f3.5-5.6.
The first two images have an Orton Effect applied which obviously has nothing to do with the kit lenses.
May 12, 2016 11:14:11 #
I like your topic as well as your photos.
I have never been one who looked down on kit lens as I consider these major camera brand not stupid enough to be selling their cameras with "junk" lens. So far my Canon kit lens have met all my expectation. But then I am an amateur/hobby photographer - experienced but not reaching for the quality I see produced by so many here on UHH.
I have never been one who looked down on kit lens as I consider these major camera brand not stupid enough to be selling their cameras with "junk" lens. So far my Canon kit lens have met all my expectation. But then I am an amateur/hobby photographer - experienced but not reaching for the quality I see produced by so many here on UHH.
camerapapi wrote:
Many cameras come with so called kit lenses. Quali... (show quote)
May 12, 2016 11:28:39 #
I personally would have not posted this. Since you've given these pics a radical treatment/filter, these no longer have any relevance to kit lenses but more what you can do with your computer.
I only see it as a Gallery post.
For your topic heading, these would need to be as sooc as you can make them!!!
I only see it as a Gallery post.
For your topic heading, these would need to be as sooc as you can make them!!!
May 12, 2016 12:12:26 #
camerapapi wrote:
Many cameras come with so called kit lenses. Quali... (show quote)
Most "kit" lenses do offer sufficient image quality for the vast majority of shots, where they REALLY come up short is in the durability arena. They have plastic barrels, usually plastic mounts, and always most if not all plastic internal optical elements.
May 12, 2016 13:43:04 #
This quite true- the metal & glass does make for a heavier and more durable lens however there is a vast difference in the quality/durability of plastics as there is in metals and glass. When I first ventured into film SLR I
was shopping for used lens for a Konica and found so many "sloppy"lens-worn out metal and glass lens.
was shopping for used lens for a Konica and found so many "sloppy"lens-worn out metal and glass lens.
MT Shooter wrote:
Most "kit" lenses do offer sufficient image quality for the vast majority of shots, where they REALLY come up short is in the durability arena. They have plastic barrels, usually plastic mounts, and always most if not all plastic internal optical elements.
May 12, 2016 13:52:35 #
MT Shooter wrote:
Most "kit" lenses do offer sufficient image quality for the vast majority of shots, where they REALLY come up short is in the durability arena. They have plastic barrels, usually plastic mounts, and always most if not all plastic internal optical elements.
Not all plastics are equal. The plastic the lens manufacturers use isn't the same stuff you find in toys and toothbrushes. It doesn't warp, break or shatter easily at all. Even bakelite, the plastic camera manufacturers commonly used many decades ago for camera bodies, has over time proven to be a very durable, long-lasting material; and the plastic they use now on lenses is far more stronger and durable than bakelite ever was. It would take some serious abuse to damage it... like throwing your lens off a cliff or from a bridge overpass.
May 12, 2016 14:02:06 #
Boy is this true- a few years ago I wanted to drill a hole in an electrical out let box I was going to use for a project - I burned up a wood drill bit and never got that hole. Space age plastic is strong stuff.
rook2c4 wrote:
Not all plastics are equal. The plastic the lens m... (show quote)
May 12, 2016 14:44:07 #
rook2c4 wrote:
It would take some serious abuse to damage it... like throwing your lens off a cliff or from a bridge overpass.
Or your camera rolling off the car seat when braking, or dropping the lens on the carpet when changing lenses, or your kid sitting on the camera. The internal plastic zoom mechanisms are ridiculously fragile on these kit lenses, I have a whole plastic bin full of them to demonstrate the problem. The 18-55mm models are the worst.
May 12, 2016 15:46:14 #
MT Shooter wrote:
Or your camera rolling off the car seat when braking, or dropping the lens on the carpet when changing lenses, or your kid sitting on the camera. The internal plastic zoom mechanisms are ridiculously fragile on these kit lenses, I have a whole plastic bin full of them to demonstrate the problem. The 18-55mm models are the worst.
What's happening is parts within the lens dislodging upon impact, but not the plastic itself actually breaking. Those are two very different things. If you spent any time actually taking apart and repairing these non-functioning lenses instead of just throwing them into a bin, you would know this.
May 12, 2016 15:48:58 #
rook2c4 wrote:
What's happening is parts within the lens dislodging upon impact, but not the plastic itself actually breaking. Those are two very different things. If you spent any time actually taking apart and repairing these non-functioning lenses instead of just throwing them into a bin, you would know this.
That's the whole point, they are not WORTH taking apart to repair because the replacement cost is so cheap. The labor costs to repair are simply not worth it. These "dislodged" internal components are usually drive pins for the zoom barrels breaking off, or zoom and/or focusing barrels themselves breaking. And yes, they are all plastic inside.) The lenses are MADE to be throw-away lenses from the day they are designed. The manufacturers WANT you to replace them, hopefully with more expensive, better built versions.
And I do have some of these plastic kit lenses that I have sawn in half to show their build, it gets interesting seeing the differences between brands.
This one has aluminum sleeves to hold the lens elements in groups, the only one I have found them in.
May 12, 2016 19:40:51 #
Sharpshooter, I made it clear that the Orton Effect I created in the first two images had nothing to do with the lens. I posted the last shot with the usual editing only. It was never my intention to present here works of art but I hope you have nothing against my showing my creativity. If anyone wants to judge how good the images produced by the Panasonic lens are No.3 should be more than enough and when using the original a crop to 50% is sharp and detailed as it can be and that crop makes for a huge enlargement in real life.
I have seen discussions of kit lenses before and they are good lenses for the beginner and serve to tell us our preferences when it comes to buying better lenses. Not all kit lenses are created equal and as I said some are better than others.
I have a 18-70 f3.5-4.5 AF-S lens by Nikon that has been a favorite for the quality of the images and when it comes to its construction I can say that it is very well built and the rear element has a seal against the environment which is unheard of with kit lenses.
I have seen discussions of kit lenses before and they are good lenses for the beginner and serve to tell us our preferences when it comes to buying better lenses. Not all kit lenses are created equal and as I said some are better than others.
I have a 18-70 f3.5-4.5 AF-S lens by Nikon that has been a favorite for the quality of the images and when it comes to its construction I can say that it is very well built and the rear element has a seal against the environment which is unheard of with kit lenses.
May 12, 2016 19:42:23 #
May 13, 2016 07:26:41 #
MT Shooter wrote:
Most "kit" lenses do offer sufficient image quality for the vast majority of shots, where they REALLY come up short is in the durability arena. They have plastic barrels, usually plastic mounts, and always most if not all plastic internal optical elements.
Only fairly recently I started getting more seriously interested in photography and I have mostly been using kit lenses - supplemented by some older lenses that I picked up for next to nothing. None of the lenses cost me more than $250 but I treat them as what they are, delicate instruments, things to be handled with care. I've had no trouble with any of them.
The larger collection of cheap lenses gives me a chance to see what I use and perhaps in time I will decide to put some serious money into a really good lens but I'm not nearly there yet. But I'm not sure that the ruggedness of a $2000 lens would be that significant to me - I would probably treat it with even greater care than I treat my less rugged $250 kit lens.
May 13, 2016 07:32:26 #
SharpShooter wrote:
I personally would have not posted this. Since you've given these pics a radical treatment/filter, these no longer have any relevance to kit lenses but more what you can do with your computer.
I only see it as a Gallery post.
For your topic heading, these would need to be as sooc as you can make them!!!
I only see it as a Gallery post.
For your topic heading, these would need to be as sooc as you can make them!!!
You are exactly correct. No one can really judge the quality of the "kit lenses" in question due to major image alteration. Geesus.
May 13, 2016 08:02:29 #
I started off with 2 kit lenses plus .5 wide angle and a 2x screw on lens. the kit lenses worked fine for me until i learned enough to get in trouble. the plastic guts on one did strip after 6 or so years.
one point, there are cheap kit lenses and good to excellent kit lenses. a case in point, one online dealer was selling a top model canon for the year 2007, and offered 2 mid-level lenses. he also offered the same camera with 2 "G" lenses, some kit hay??
one point, there are cheap kit lenses and good to excellent kit lenses. a case in point, one online dealer was selling a top model canon for the year 2007, and offered 2 mid-level lenses. he also offered the same camera with 2 "G" lenses, some kit hay??
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.