Do you still use the Kit Lenses?

[NateNLogansDad]

I feel for every one of you folks diagnosed with NAS I feel for you, I really really do. I have one foot over and will be crossing into DSLR world soon. My biggest question is on the kit lenses. Is it worth it to even get them or just go with the body and pick out something else?

Basically I was looking at the Nikon D5000 (But haven't ruled out the D90) and they keep having "deals" with the 18-55 VR AF and 55-200 VR-AF for about $950.

I was thinking about going for just the body and one lens that covered most of the ground that the other two handle. Than of course maybe a 35mm 1.8 or something along those lines. Any input would be really helpful!

 

[VVFF]

I feel for every one of you folks diagnosed with NAS I feel for you, I really really do. I have one foot over and will be crossing into DSLR world soon. My biggest question is on the kit lenses. Is it worth it to even get them or just go with the body and pick out something else?

Basically I was looking at the Nikon D5000 (But haven't ruled out the D90) and they keep having "deals" with the 18-55 VR AF and 55-200 VR-AF for about $950.

I was thinking about going for just the body and one lens that covered most of the ground that the other two handle. Than of course maybe a 35mm 1.8 or something along those lines. Any input would be really helpful!

Depends on your style of shooting. I skipped the kit lens with my 50D and went straight to the 17-55mm F2.8 for its better IS, better resolution, and low constant aperture. The 50D necessitates quality glass in order to make the most of the 15MP resolution as the lens is often the limiting factor at this resolution. I also enjoy shooting low light and so the F2.8 was important to me.

If you shoot mainly outdoors or in good lighting conditions and have a lower resolution camera I would say that starting out with the kit lens would be no issue. It all depends on your expectations.

 

[NateNLogansDad]

I'm still trying to figure my style out

 

[ssanders79]

Consider getting the 18-200mm instead for the kit 18-55 and the 55-200mm. I still use my kit lens as it provides me with the wide angle.

 

[wenrob]

The 18-105 is considered the kit lens for the D90 and I use it mostly for things like birthday parties where I need a little wider and a little longer. Otherwise my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 is pretty much my main lens. Eventually I'd like to get the 18-55 f/2.8 and the 70-200 f/2.8 VR to cover both ends. However I'll probably hang onto the 18-105 for gp and situations where it would be ill advised to change lenses.

When I had my D40 I never used the kit lenses (18-55 and 50-200VR). I used the 18-200 exclusively.

 

[boBQuincy]

When I want to travel light I take the kit lens (18-55 Canon). Optically it is not bad (2nd gen with IS) and I can't think of a zoom that is smaller and lighter.

 

[YesDear]

My general opinion is that kit lens are great financial deals for those getting started with digital SLRs. They provide a good range of zoom and reasonable IQ for the $.

That being said I do not believe you will find anyone on this board that has gained experience that has not invested in better glass. You will find that most of us covet better glass over the camera itself.

When I bought my D200 I got it with the 18-200. I did because that was the only way you could get that lens was with the camera. I have never purchased a kit lens, but I have been doing photography since the 1970's

I bet most here would admit that if they had to do it over again they would buy better glass rather than kit lens.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

I knew literally nothing about lenses. When I bought my Olympus dSLR, it came with two kit lenses, a 14-54 and a 50-150 (actually considered very good quality for kits). They were great for a while, until I began to understand their limitations, and I also realized I really did not enjoy having to change lenses as I'm constantly shooting a variety of things. I picked up an 18-180 that is my walkaround lens and that works out much better for me. I have no regrets, really, as it was all a learning process. At some point when I upgrade, I'll give my son my current camera with the the kit lenses and probably the pancake I bought, along with the Slingbag, and he'll have a nice little starter kit. I'll still have my walkaround, a Sigma prime, and hopefully a 2.8 zoom by that point, and that should cover me pretty well - for the time being. I think many times, especially for us newbies, as your mind opens up to new concepts, you find something else you need but it's all fun.

 

[DebºoºS]

When I got my D200 I got the 18-200 with it. But I was fortunate to have a wide variety of very good lenses already. The Nikon bug bit me in the 70's.
The value and $ of a kit lens is well worth it IMHO. They also help you figure out what fixed length you really want.

 

[kaffinito]

I would skip the kit lenses and go for the 18-200 as has been suggested. It's a much better lens than either of the two kit lenses.

It wasn't long after I bought the D60 with the two kit lenses that I began suffering from NAS.

 

[DisneySuiteFreak]

I bought my D80 with the kit lens which was the 18-135 and I also got the 70-300VR. I still have them. I used the kit lens until I bought the 18-200VR. The 70-300VR came in handy many times for longer reach. It's a very decent entry level zoom lens.
I also didn't know about lenses when I bought my D80, and was still (am still?) trying to figure out my style. I invested in the 50mm 1.8 (wish I had gotten the 1.4 which was much cheaper than it is now). The 1.8 is still a very good lens for the price. It has nice bokeh...but I know the 1.4 lens is even nicer! I also got the 85mm 1.8 (again, wish I had gotten the 1.4 but it was and is still priced out of my league). It's a really nice portrait lens though; it's just, I know the 1.4 would be even better! (Okay I am addicted!) I got the Sigma 10-20 which is good enough for wide angle shots, and the Sigma 30mm 1.4 (I love this lens!). I also bought the Sigma 18-50 2.8 which is also a nice lens, but with the rest of my arsenal, not used as often as it could be primarily due to size and reach. It's just so much more convenient to not have to swap lenses unless I know I'm taking a particular type of photo that would require the use of a different lens.
Since I got the 18-200VR, it resides on my camera 90% of the time. It's a great walk around lens. I know it's not very popular on some of the other pro camera forums, but for what it is to me (a total amateur) it's great! If you can get the D90 w/ the kit lens which is like 18-100 or something like that (see Wenrob's post) I heard that it's supposedly an even better lens than the 18-200VR as far as optics go. That's what I've read anyway in some other photography forums. Of course, you'd be missing some of the reach... I seriously would try to swing the 18-200VR if you can. It does come in handy and you won't have to worry about swapping lenses when walking around the parks or anywhere else. Don't get me wrong, I still use my other lenses, but if I'm just looking to grab the camera and go without lugging around the entire bag of lenses, the 18-200VR is what I take. It's very convenient.
I can't bring myself to part with any of my lenses even the original D80 kit lens! I keep the original kit lens just in case something happens to my 18-200VR. My DH was relieved that when I bought my D90 I got just the body and no other lenses. My dream is to be able to afford the 2.8 Nikon lenses...maybe one day...Welcome to the land of NAS!
Oh yeah, I'd really weigh the pros and cons of the D5000. I heard that Nikon has issued recalls on a bunch of them, something to do with the battery IIRC. If you can swing the D90, it's a great camera!

 

[MarkBarbieri]

It really depends on the kit lens. Mine is relatively nice and I use it when light weight and longer range are more important to me. Mine's a Canon 24-105 f/4 IS.

Everything about lenses is a tradeoff. Price, weight, size, and speed all fight against each other. I'd start with the kit lens. Learn what is important to you. Some people hate changing lenses and so the extra cost and lower image quality of super-range zooms are ideal for them. Others don't like zooms and at all and find that the performance of having a set of primes is ideal.

There are a large variety of lenses for sale because people pick their tradeoffs differently. You've got to shoot for a while to learn what is important to you.

 

[fitzperry]

If the two lens kit gives you a significant savings as compared to the 18-200, I'd suggest getting that and waiting a bit to find out what you REALLY want. I started out with a D70 and the 18-70 kit lens about 5 or 6 years ago. Then Nikon introduced the 18-200, and I figured I would end up with that. But the more pictures I took, the more I realized that I wanted fast lenses and that what I'd give up in image quality with the 18-200 was a bigger deal to me than changing lenses. So, if $$ is an issue, go the less expensive route now and save it for later. You'll need it--NAS is irresistable.

OTOH, if you can get a good deal on the 18-200, then why not? You can always sell it if you decide later it's not what you want.

 

[KarenAylwood]

My general opinion is that kit lens are great financial deals for those getting started with digital SLRs. They provide a good range of zoom and reasonable IQ for the $.

That being said I do not believe you will find anyone on this board that has gained experience that has not invested in better glass. You will find that most of us covet better glass over the camera itself.

When I bought my D200 I got it with the 18-200. I did because that was the only way you could get that lens was with the camera. I have never purchased a kit lens, but I have been doing photography since the 1970's

I bet most here would admit that if they had to do it over again they would buy better glass rather than kit lens.

This is exactly what I was thinking when I read the first post. I have the kit lens for my Canon XSi but haven't used it even one day since I got my 18-200. I do have it as a backup and plan on keeping it until I get a few more lenses.

I have four lenses:
18-55mm kit
Canon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6
Sigma 30mm f/1.4
Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro

... and I NEVER use the kit now. I was a beginner exactly a year ago when I bought my first dSLR. I had no idea what lenses I'd want or even if photography was the right hobby for me. The kit was a good (and cheap) way for me to find out if this is what I really wanted.

I guess I'm not exactly on par with YesDear because I don't really regret the kit lens, but if I knew this was something I was definitely going to spend lots of time and money on... I wouldn't have bought the kit. For now it's a nice backup but will soon be obsolete when I get "better glass" (an L series! )

 

[bob100]

I feel for every one of you folks diagnosed with NAS I feel for you, I really really do. I have one foot over and will be crossing into DSLR world soon. My biggest question is on the kit lenses. Is it worth it to even get them or just go with the body and pick out something else?

Basically I was looking at the Nikon D5000 (But haven't ruled out the D90) and they keep having "deals" with the 18-55 VR AF and 55-200 VR-AF for about $950.
I was thinking about going for just the body and one lens that covered most of the ground that the other two handle. Than of course maybe a 35mm 1.8 or something along those lines. Any input would be really helpful!

don't know about Nikon but the Canon "kit" lens (18-55IS) is pretty good

 

[wenrob]

Since I got the 18-200VR, it resides on my camera 90% of the time. It's a great walk around lens. I know it's not very popular on some of the other pro camera forums, but for what it is to me (a total amateur) it's great! If you can get the D90 w/ the kit lens which is like 18-100 or something like that (see Wenrob's post) I heard that it's supposedly an even better lens than the 18-200VR as far as optics go. That's what I've read anyway in some other photography forums. Of course, you'd be missing some of the reach... I seriously would try to swing the 18-200VR if you can.

It's 18-105 and sharper then 18-200 IMHO. I sometimes miss the extra reach but not too often. I miss the 18 end more when using my Tamron. I've learned to compensate for both though. I'm in love with my Tammy what can I say?

That leads to what Mark and others have said, you may be better off starting w/the kit and figuring out your style. I thought for sure I'd never need anything more then the 18-200 and now I have myself a little collection going with a wish list a mile long. I want faster and sharper and am willing to switch lens out to get that. I wasn't willing to do that when I first started.

And yeah, if you can swing the D90 you won't regret it.