Good lens beyond standard 18-55 'kit' lens?

I use my Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS most of the time, but sounds like you don't want to spend $1K for a lens. Which is perfectly understandable.

I mention this because I upgraded from the 18-55 IS - within its obvious limitations it's very nearly as good optically as the 17-55.

In fact, it's good enough that I kept it after I upgraded and use it when I want a more compact package (such as packing camera gear in my motorcycle tankbag).

So I join in recommend starting out with the 18-55 IS.

-js

wow thanks for all the great adivce, I really appreciate it.

So I shouldn't really even consider getting the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8-4.5 DC OS HSM and just wait to get something better down the line. I found this lens for only $200 and getting the body only it wasn't going to be much more than the kit.
My main reason for looking at this was of the 2.8f over the 3.5f of the Canon.

I'll take 10 for $200!

B&H is where i found the price. Unless I'm not looking at the right lens from Sigma's site. Adorama had it for this price as well I believe.

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …50mm_f_2_8_4_5_​DC_OS.html

Why is everyone recommending the upgraded kit lens

On a cropper, 17-50 range will stay on the camera for 90% of time. While the kit lens is good for its specifications, I really dont feel f3.5-5.6 is adequate.

Go for the tamron 17-50 nonvc, better everything than the Kit lens

TeleFragger wrote in post #11377021
i too have the 18-55 IS kit lens.. while it is good.. i borrowed my neighbors Tamron 17-50f/2.8 and it is niceER... bout $400...

i decided to go the 24-105L used way.. and couple it with the 55-250 for tele... keeping the kit lens for anything that i need below 24 for now.... and of course the 85mm for night stuff...

think i got a (theoretically as i dont have all lenses in possession yet) good working setup for the ranges... other than the 100-400 for someday..

That is one odd-ball mix of glass. But hey if it works for you... go for it.

Chenger wrote in post #11377842
Go for the tamron 17-50 nonvc, better everything than the Kit lens

Better IS?

number six wrote in post #11378260
Better IS?

surprisingly, yes

that is, if you believe the owner of www.photozone.de image stabilization degrades optical resolution of a lens over time !

Chenger wrote in post #11377842
Why is everyone recommending the upgraded kit lens

On a cropper, 17-50 range will stay on the camera for 90% of time. While the kit lens is good for its specifications, I really dont feel f3.5-5.6 is adequate.

Go for the tamron 17-50 nonvc, better everything than the Kit lens

For the OP I recommend it because he its an inexpensive upgrade and a jumping off point for exploring where and what he wants to shoot. I'd rather see someone spend $100 they can get back by selling it at any point and go through the process of discovery without laying out too much cash.

nureality wrote in post #11378084
That is one odd-ball mix of glass. But hey if it works for you... go for it.

really? it covers a good range.. no?

and for OP.. yeah while a cheaper lens is nice to start with... you may have to work a bit harder for a cleaner pic... i got to find that pic of my cat i took with the tamron...

ok im off..