CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

David, you missed the 'L' designation on these two f/4 'kit' lenses that are packaged only with high end Full Frame cameras from Canon (5Diii and 6D). You're kind of mixing apples and oranges in terms of this discussion of entry level kits ...

watchcow Loc: Moore, Oklahoma

Kit lenses are all over the map. I only have personal experience with Nikon and I don't replace cameras every season. 9 years ago I bought a used Nikon D70. I had AF lenses from my film fleet and didn't think I would need anything else. The APS sensor changed my mind pretty quickly. At the time the kit lens Nikon was pushing was the 18-70mm 3.5-4.5, so I bought one used. I still have and use this lens. It is sharp, and other people commented that as a kit lens that one was a spoiler for sure. AF was fast, the images were sharp but that thing did have a lot of distortion.

7 years ago I bought a shiny new D200. that 18-70 was good enough I felt no reason to get another lens. 60,000 images later, I still have that same lens.

about 6 weeks ago I finally got a different camera. when I ordered a D5300 the body only package I wanted was backordered. there were some promotional spiffs and free shipping on a kit and when I figured the cost difference between the body only from a vendor that had them in stock, and this kit I could get at a discount, both with 3 days shipping, the included 18-55 VR II lens made a net difference of $8. So I got the kit. this 18-55 is a limited range since I have had the reach of 70mm for so long, but the VR works well, it weighs nothing, and for distortion, it is nothing compared to the 18-70 I was married to for years. The D5300 corrects the distortion of the 18-70 for me automatically and that lens still stays on the camera, and I use the 18-55 lens when I leave the camera bag in the car and know I will be walking a long ways because it is so light and handy. I have posted several pictures around here intentionally to demonstrate that kit lenses are not the steaming piles they get accused of being. with sloppy technique I still get usable pictures and if I pay attention I get stellar images. I just need to do it with adequate light.

Comparing kit lenses and whining about it is like people that ask if a rifle can hit a golf ball at 500 yards. Sure it can, but can YOU hit a golf ball at 500 yards? I have classic primes and professional zooms, and for what I do, most of the time it makes no difference. If I can't see a difference, I am not going to let a lab report poison the well and make me think ill of the lens that is doing a hell of a job.

bull drink water Loc: pontiac mi.

there use to be a website that packaged kits with lenses that you describe, they did cost a lot more, but as I remember they "did" offer a discount on the price. i'l bet that if you approached some of the major dealers they would offer you a hi-end canon with 2 "L" lenses at some discount.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Just dealt with this in another forum. Actually, at F8 you would be hard pressed to tell the difference between a pic taken with a kit lens and one taken with a lens costing 10x as much, unless you are comparing the current Nikon 24-85 with the 24-70. This kit lens is pretty weak at the edges and at the longer focal length. The AF-D version was even worse. I would opt for the 24-120 F4, which is priced in between the kit and the pro lens.

But at the DX level, the 18-55 and the 55-200 are actually very good. The main concerns are build quality, resale value, and performance - they are nether fast focusing nor great in low light.

So rather than to make a blanket statement, you should look at each lens individually, and see if it meets your budgetary and photographic needs.

Crwiwy Loc: Devon UK

Pro lens are tougher - and vastly more expensive. Some on UHH appear to be of the opinion that if it doesn't cost a fortune then it must be rubbish!
I recently saw a video by a professional photographer showing what is in his bag. He was quite happy to admit that one of his spare lens was a 'kit' lens and he used it quite often.

marty wild Loc: England

Nothing with kit lens. You have to start some where! But if you want to carry on you will need long arms to get into them corners of the your pockets.

If you want bokeh with a kit lens you will need a sandy beach. But Bokeh with a F1.4 box lens can be accomplished in small garden

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Couldn't agree more - let the brand-snobs spend their money - I will continue to use the value proposition to make my gear selections.

mrjcall Loc: Woodfin, NC

It's really quite simple, if YOU like the results you are getting from your gear, then that gear is fine for you regardless of what it is, eh? The implication, of course, is that you are, in fact, shooting for yourself and not for a client or someone else... :wink:

stephena Loc: Carmel, Indiana

If you want to try the Fuji X system, the kit lens is the 18-55mm stabilized, and it is excellent! Rave reviews from all quarters. Go to DPR for a review. Steve

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

There are significant differences. Construction, metal vs plastics, weather proofing, VR/IS, creep, coatings, electronics, auto focus motor, quickness and focus accuracy, light sensitivity, sharpness, distortion, vignetting, chromatic aberration, and more. Some of these issues may not visible on a computer monitor or on a 7 x 5 print but they very noticeable as you get into larger print sizes. And it is at these larger sizes where the differences in lens quality starts to be significant. Renting is a good start, printing is the proof.

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

Some kit lenses are professional lenses. The Canon 5D Mark III is offered with a 24-105mm f/4L lens. It's not Canons best L series lens but it's built like a tank. The basic differences between a kit lens and the pro lenses are that the pro lenses are built like a tank and they are usually fast lenses. They are built like a tank for professional, every day use that can take the punishment of being switched out often, carried often and operated with regularity. The kit lenses often times have more plastic, less expensively ground glass, noisier autofocus motors and IS gyros, and plastic mounts. They are fine for most casual users. The kit lenses don't usually focus as fast, and the IS parts are yesterdays design where the pro lenses usually have the latest technology in IS. In other words, the IS on a kit lens might be a 2 stop Image Stability while a pro lens might have newer IS technology that is worthy of 3 or 4 stops of IS hand holding ability.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Not necessarily - best to take each lens on its own merits - I have been really surprised by images taken with an 18-70 Nikon (kit lens provided with the D70) and printed at 24x36. In similar fashion, the 18-200 kit lens and D200 combo - images printed at 30x48.

One Camera One Lens Loc: Traveling

onyxtiger, I must say SS has finally got it right..lol
If a person think a lens is better because it cost more than that person is really fooling himself. Many photographers do advance as they move up in their careers, but it still all depends on the shooter and NOT the lens. You made a good choice to stick with what works for you.............from one marine to another, Semper FI, and keep up the good work....

One Camera One Lens Loc: Traveling

onyxtiger, I must say SS has finally got it right..lol
If a person think a lens is better because it cost more than that person is really fooling himself. Many photographers do advance as they move up in their careers, but it still all depends on the shooter and NOT the lens. You made a good choice to stick with what works for you.............from one marine to another, Semper FI, and keep up the good work....

oldtool2 Loc: South Jersey

No can of worms, in fact, a good question. For many it may be all the lens that they will ever need.

As a general rule "kit" lenses are not the best lenses the manufacture makes. This is not to say they are bad lenses though, just not the best. These lenses are designed to give a beginner a good place to start. The IQ may not be the best but many of them will give very good photos.

I think the problem many have with kit lenses is they are not the best choice for the type of photography someone wants to do. In other words there are often better lens choices. You are normally better off buying the camera and lens separately so you get a lens that will do what you are going to be using it for.

Jim D