18-55mm isnt that bad...

No pp, just wanted to show that the kit lens can produce some decent bokeh. Dont mind my cheap wal-mart tripod.

Hey, it gets the job done! A good copy with a good calibration and such makes some photos.
There is another thread with this link. Kit lend a 300D!!!
http://robertmekis.com …photos&subkateg​=landscape

My brief encounters with the 18-55 have been less than pleasant, but I never did actually take any pictures with it (it was on a camera that I was loaned, I took it off and attached a 17-40 ). I'd destroy it with a few weeks use (dang wear and tear!) , but with a little know how you can get nice shots from it-- at f/8 I understand that it's hard to tell the Ls from the kits.

This cheap lens has also great Macro capability:

http://www.pbase.com/k​_amj/image/66678356

I had the kit lens but returned it for the Sigma 17-70, I really wanted to keep the kit lens as I was on a tight budget & after reading & looking up MTF figures I tried shooting at the optimal aperture for the lens but when I compare what I get on my 17-70 at the same aperture the kit lens was just plain junk! an overall lack of sharpness, softer in the corners & a high CA & this was stopped down.

Some copies are better than others but I tried 2 & decided to get shot of them both, I guess it depends on how fussy you are but for me it just wasnt up to scratch at all.

If I was only going to take photographs for displaying on the internet, on a website or something where they have to be resized down & sharpened, then a kit lens is fine, but as with everything I buy im a real fussy bugger & I knew the kit lens would annoy me after a while, it was cheap construction too, but overall its not bad considering the price I guess.

Nick

See now that Walmart tripods a big problem, forget the kit lens, before you get a new lens you need to throw that thing in the ocean and get yourself a manfrotto or something.

JaGWiRE wrote in post #2246900
See now that Walmart tripods a big problem, forget the kit lens, before you get a new lens you need to throw that thing in the ocean and get yourself a manfrotto or something.

It's not level either (or were you taking 'artistic' pictures of cars)

The kit lens is quite capable for a lot of situations, especially if stopped down to around f/8 or f/11 - As with all lenses and cameras it can be the person behind it that performs the magic - give a real photographer a disposable and he will take interesting shots...

I have a carbon fiber tripod but I need t get a good ball head (for the tripod).

ChrisBlaze wrote in post #2246914
I have a carbon fiber tripod but I need t get a good ball head (for the tripod).

Yes. Tripods need to be carefully picked. It's a system, really.
Check out the Bogen 488RC2. You will have room to grow with this. 17lb capacity, pan plate, and smooth as slik, err, I meant silk.
Do yourself a favor and never try an Acra or RSS head. You will think everything else is pure crap after that.

foghorn wrote in post #2246926
Yes. Tripods need to be carefully picked. It's a system, really.
Check out the Bogen 488RC2. You will have room to grow with this. 17lb capacity, pan plate, and smooth as slik, err, I meant silk.
Do yourself a favor and never try an Acra or RSS head. You will think everything else is pure crap after that.

I agree, I went straight to the decent stuff (3001pro manfrotto), but read a lot about people wasting money onw almart stuff that brekas on them easy, and you take risks with your gear on them.

I have a 486RC2 I share with my monopod and tripod, might add a 488RC2 or 3030pan and tilt (or a pan and tilt of some sort in general) to my tripod though and leave the 486RC2 on my monopod. I'm pretty happy.

My kit lens is perfectly acceptable used correctly. Of course the build quality is lousy, but I don't slam my gear around.... I won't be buying used stuff from tsaraleksi!

i have better lenses but still use the kit lens on occasion. It works fine. for the very little money it costs to get this lens with a camera body, it is good value.

It is certainly the best lens for anyone new to DSLR to use initially, in order to learn the craft behind the process. ie how to use the camera itself, composition and lighting and so on. that is far more important than any chunk of glass, however well engineered and 'L'-like!

I still use my kit lens once a while. Works great if you use it within it's sweet spot.

I think the usefulness of the 18-55 is played down too much. When I bought my 350D, I was expecting complete rubbish after reading reviews of the camera. They had said the only thing that let the camera down was the kit lens. After using it for a little while, I found it to be quite versatile.

OK, so IQ isn't awesome, it tends to blur the corners when shooting wide at large apertures, and feels like a toy (I could say it feels a little more solid than the 50mm 1.8 which is a great little lens), but bang-for-buck it can't be beaten and it will sure holds it's own until you can afford better glass (or should say "afford glass"? - 18-55's plastic elements and all...)