Should I get the kit lens....or just the body of the XT?

[olivia]

I am getting ready to order the Rebel XT. I already have the 28-105 lens, one of the older ones. I know it's not a great lens, but it will get me started.

Is it worth getting the kit lens or would I be better off using that $100 for the 50 1.8?

[tim]

The 18-55 lens is a good value wide angle lens, if you want a cheap wide angle then get it, otherwise save your money and get the nifty fifty :)

[gsmx2]

Kind of what Tim says. Your 28 - 105 probably came as a stock lens on an SLR. The 18-55 will give you that range once you add the 1.6 factor. I think that I would get the 18-55 and then add the nifty-fifty when I could.

gsm x2

[DocFrankenstein]

I am getting ready to order the Rebel XT. I already have the 28-105 lens, one of the older ones. I know it's not a great lens, but it will get me started.

Is it worth getting the kit lens or would I be better off using that $100 for the 50 1.8?
You need the 50/1.8 anyways... unless you want to spring for 50/1.4 which is 300 bucks.

But 50 is a telephoto, and you'll find yourself limited with it.

If you want a wide angle zoom, for 100 bucks you can get the kit lens which is an ok lens.

Or you can get 35 f/2 which is 200 bucks. It will be your "normal" lens and then add the fifty later...
And for wide angle you'd get either russian 16mm or 17mm tokina?

Or you can shell out 600 bucks for 17-40 L and you'll be forever happy with it.

[skyphix]

I'm happy I got the kit lens - I can't afford a 17-40 or 24-70 yet, so until then, I've got something roughly in that range that I wont feel bad about giving up to upgrade.

And definitely get the 50mm/1.8 - I dont have one, but with any luck will be getting one soon.

[mr.photoguy]

get the 18-55 .. it's only a 100 bucks, and you will 100% for sure need that 18mm ..
I noticed being limited to 28mm on a 1.6x is very dissapointing.

[ShadowFlyP]

Kind of what Tim says. Your 28 - 105 probably came as a stock lens on an SLR. The 18-55 will give you that range once you add the 1.6 factor. I think that I would get the 18-55 and then add the nifty-fifty when I could.

gsm x2

What do you mean the 18-55 will give the same range as the 28-105?? Do the math, 18-55 is a much smaller range. The 17-85 provides the same range when you add the 1.6 factor, not the 18-55.

It really depends on what kind of shooting you're going to be doing. I have the 17-85 lens and when shooting buildings I would say that 17 still isn't really wide enough. For everything else, I tend to stay in the upper range of that lens, so your 28-105 might be sufficient to get you started. I would recommend saving the money, play with the 28-105 for a while, and then save for the 17-40L if you want the extra wide-angle range (or just a wide angle prime). From what I've read, the 18-55 is a pretty low quality lens. If it's much worse than the 17-85 (which isn't a BAD lens, but isn't the greatest) I think it'd be a waste of money for you sense you already have a lens that will provide a good range for everyday shooting.

[mr.photoguy]

Do you mean the 18-55 is low quality in build, or image quality?

build ... yes I agree...

image quality, then I would have to disagree..Although it's not the best. It is still a pretty sharp lens. Especially for landscapes it does good, with some softness at the edges, which is where the 17-40L stays sharp..

for 100 dollars he can't go wrong with it. Also he will be begging for something wider than 28.. been there done that.

[symes]

Definitly get it!!! If you aren't big on wide angle photography you will always have it for when you need it...or until you can upgrade...well worth 100 at that point...

[CyberDyneSystems]

I say get the kit lens!

Unless you are in a position to plunk down another $700.00 or so for a more robust wide zoom like the 17-40mm right this moment,. then it is a good investment to spend an extra 100.00 and have that range covered.

[Tom Reid]

CyberDyneSystems hit the nail on the head Olivia...buy small now to experiment with having that wide angle versatility. I bought my 20D body only and regret that decision. I can't buy the 18-55 seperately here in Canada so I'm faced with spending the big bucks now, unless I go Sigma 18-50 f3.5-5.6.

BTW...the 50mm 1.8 is also worth the small coin. I just bought one today. I know not all will agree with me when I say I have to look hard to find a difference in the sharpness between it and my 70-200 f2.8!!

[Anteros]

I just bought the body and bought the kit lens used separately.

I only use the kit lens on the occasions when my 28-135IS isn't wide enough (until I can afford a 10-22mm). But in the end I saved a few dollars buying them separately.

[Andy_T]

Olivia,

if you decide you want to sell it off again, you should have no problems to do so on eBay with minimal losses.

I use my Tamron 28-75/2.8 XR DI about 75 % of the time and the 50/1.8 about 20 % ... but I am sure happy to have the 18-55 for the 5% of wide angle shots where I need it.

It really is a very decent wide angle lens for the price.
I'd say get the 50/1.8 on top of it :lol:

Best regards,
Andy

[pcasciola]

I use my Tamron 28-75/2.8 XR DI about 75 % of the time and the 50/1.8 about 20 % ... but I am sure happy to have the 18-55 for the 5% of wide angle shots where I need it.
Sounds like roughly the same ratios as me. I say definitely get the kit unless you can afford something better on the wide end. I often get stuck with 28mm not being wide enough. I've already tried two other wide angles, but they are both gone now and I still have the kit lens.

[olivia]

Thanks for your advice, everyone. I'll order the body with the lens.

[dlhedg]

I would suggest getting a nice glass lense and saving on the kit. The kit lense is a very cheap lense. I bought the tamron 28-75 f2.8 and very happy. Quality is many times better than the lense in the kit. Save that hundred on the kit lense and buy a better lense.

thanks and good luck
dan h