Delderby Loc: Derby UK

I have two lenses - both of which have been included in kits. 14-45 is now eight years old, and is good. 45-200 is good depending- performs best between 60-175. The 14-45 is sharper than the 14-42 which replaced it as a kit lens on the next model - but the 14-42 has less aberrations. I understand that ALL lenses have their sweet spots.

gessman Loc: Colorado

The 18-135 IS STM lens you refer to was co-designed along with the t5i especially for video and it is the best possible lens you can use for video on your camera. It is sharp, quiet and smooth to autofocus, and is also a very sharp lens for still photography. For still photography you might get images that are a little sharper with a couple of the much more expensive "L" lens but for general use, that lens will serve you very nicely within the range it was designed to cover.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Yes, they are.

photoman022 Loc: Manchester CT USA

Never underestimate the quality of your kit lens and the photos it can produce (if you know what you're doing). I think that many people think that "kit" means "junk" (and there are equipment snobs who will tell you that). I use my wide angle kit zoom for all of my landscape photos -- and it performs superbly.

I am not an equipment snob and when I went for my 70-300 zoom, I bought the Tamron because it cost a hell of a lot less than its Nikon competitor. It doesn't have the Nikon logo, it may not be quite as sharp, but it is sure worth the $1000 less I paid for it (otherwise I still wouldn't have 70-300 zoom).

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Lets get this straight, the Nikon 70-300mm VR lens is $589 brand new. You bought a similar Tamron lens for $1000 less money? So Tamron gave you $411 just to take their lens off their hands?? Gee, Tamron has gotten a LOT more generous with you than anyone else who has bought from them, I wonder why???
The real world shooters have to pay $449 for the Tamron 70-300mm VC lens, that's a $140 savings over the Nikon offering.

rbfanman

The lenses in the kit are the same lenses as when bought separately. They are good quality...the high end of the medium quality scale. They tend to be zoom lenses, suitable for most kinds of photography. NO zoom lens is as sharp as a Prime lens. If you want the sharpest possible lens, get pro grade Prime lenses which have only one focal length. Buy a 35mm lens, and a separate 70mm lens, and a separate 105mm lens rather than a 35-105mm zoom lens. Such is costly, but provides the greatest sharpness.

The zoom lenses in kit camera systems are the best overall value for non-professional photographers, giving them a wide range of focal lengths suitable for a wide variety of applications...landscape work, portraits, astro-photos, wildlife, sports, etc. For the typical snap-shooter, or newly serious amateur photographer, kit lenses are great. If you want pro like quality, go with pro Prime lenses. There are Pro quality zoom lenses, but even they are not as sharp as Pro quality Prime lenses.

The more focal lengths you have in a lens, the more lens elements, and coatings you will have. The more lens elements, and coatings, you have in a lens, the more light-and thus image-distortion it will produce. Nothing beats a good Prime lens, though some zoom lenses do come close enough for the non-professional photographer's general usage.

Photocentric56

I fully agree with MT Shooter in regard to pricing of a kit lense purchased with camera or separately.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Yes! Are they the same as a high end lens you might buy separately, no.

I more or less favor Prime lenses but I do have a few zooms. As relating to the initial question, I kind of went by the reversed situation time-wise. When I bough my Pentax K-20D camera body new in 2009 I separately purchased a high end Pentax zoom lens for it. In fact the lens cost more that the camera at around $750 (the camera was about $725). This is a SMC DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM lens! A number of years later I purchased a older used Pentax K-100D to have converted for IR use. It came with a kit zoom, a SMC Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AL WR lens.

Anyway, since I already had the nicer lens I never have used the kit much. But I have let my (reluctant) wife use it a few times and she has gotten some pretty nice images -- especially since she had not seriously used a camera in 30 years! She used the K-20D with the kit 18-55mm and I used my K-5 with the $$$ 16-50mm. Unfortunately I can not make comparisons as we were at 10,000+ feet in the Sierras and I with a weak heart could not hike at that altitude - I sat in the car and shot around the parking lot (pretty crappy). After seeing what she got, I was shocked!

I have not made one on one comparisons of the two lenses because like I said at the outset, for landscapes I would probably choose a 19mm, 28mm, or 35mm lens and a 50mm macro for close-ups.

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

:thumbup: :thumbup:

JBPDXOR Loc: Oregon

I may have missed this answer however, the kit len are not using a good stepper motor like the USM lenes. Like my 75-300mm III Canon zoom, it is slower to find focus. It is plastic built housing.

jfn007 Loc: Close to the middle of nowhere.

I can vouch for Nikon's kit lens, an 18-55mm lens. Very crisp and has VR.

Nikon_DonB Loc: Chicago

Ya know. I've really been trying NOT to say anything...But The "kit" lens designation doesn't mean a "Hill of Beans! sometimes"
Granted the 18-55mm lenses are common starter lenses with the entry level DSLR's of the major manufacturers. I had a Nikkor 18-55mmVRg with my D3100 and it was a good clear lens for it's purposses.
I think there are many people that like "bashing" them as inferior because those aren't as "fast" as their f2.8's or f1.4's. Not everyone can afford the performance of the big prime 2.8's. I'd gladly accept one. Nikkor mount please!
GRANTED!. It's mathematics, economics and glass quality. I like to find anyone who can "bash" the 24-85 "kit" lens designed by Nikon to accompany the D6x0 cameras. Should that be the case, "You" obviously "Don't know how to use it." The 24-85mmVRg starts at f3.5. That's a good size hole(at 72mm) and mighty close to the f2.8(about half a stop)! The purpose of these are to cover a larger focal length for more applications and able to accommodate a larger group of shooters. Why else would they sell so many copies of each of the kits?

Marilia Loc: Dallas, TX

I'm pretty new to DSLRs, bought my first one, the Canon t5i earlier this year with the 18-135mm STM lens kit to get me started. Now just yearning for a little longer lens without breaking the bank...I travel a lot and don't want to carry a lot of stuff...thinking the new Tamron 16-300 mm or Sigma 18-300??? I also have a Canon 50 mm 1.4.
Suggestions?

romanticf16 Loc: Commerce Twp, MI

I doubt they test all the lenses individually and put lesser ones in "kits". There are individual differences in lenses. When I worked for Meteor photo, if we needed a 5 105mm Nikkor enlarging lenses, we'd order 15; then evaluate them for sharpness and keep the best 5 and return 10. This is common in industry. Same for Leica, and the other lens makers too. When you get to the APO Nikor 105mm they were about 1K each.

romanticf16 Loc: Commerce Twp, MI

Are you trying to "fine focus manually" on a lens not designed to do so?