Which kit lens?

Hello

I am about to buy a DSLR and have a choice in kit lens.

Either the EF-S 18-135mm 1:3.5-5.6 IS or the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens will come with the camera. The 135mm is slightly more.

Does the additional adjustment in the 135mm give up some quality?

thanks

Welcome aboard.
I'd recommend the 18-55 IS over the 18-135.
Few have anything negative to say about the former, or positive about the latter.

If you think you may want a longer focal length, look for a kit that also includes the EF-S 55-250 IS.

xarqi wrote in post #11452665
Welcome aboard.
I'd recommend the 18-55 IS over the 18-135.
Few have anything negative to say about the former, or positive about the latter.

If you think you may want a longer focal length, look for a kit that also includes the EF-S 55-250 IS.

+1 I'd say about the same thing.

Welcome to the forum!

EDIT: Wow, you joined in 2005 and this is your first post?! Intense!

themadman wrote in post #11452699
EDIT: Wow, you joined in 2005 and this is your first post?! Intense!

That's some fine lurking right there!

i wish I would have learned something in that time. I wanted an SLR back in 2005 but ended up getting a point and shoot which is what the DSLR I am buying now will replace.

If it helps, I plan to first use this camera for single person portraits outdoors with minimal to some background. Which lens would be best for that right off the bat?
Something like this.

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

For this type of work you are best off with as long and fast a lens as you can afford, and probably a zoom (for ease of framing).
In rough order of increasing cost and suitability:
55-250 IS
70-200/4 (IS)
70-200/2.8 (IS)

... or look at a prime like a 135L, 200 or 300.

Dream lens for such work 200/2L (IMHO).

xarqi wrote in post #11452889
For this type of work you are best off with as long and fast a lens as you can afford, and probably a zoom (for ease of framing).
In rough order of increasing cost and suitability:
55-250 IS
70-200/4 (IS)
70-200/2.8 (IS)

... or look at a prime like a 135L, 200 or 300.

Dream lens for such work 200/2L (IMHO).

So between the two kit lens I should get the 135mm correct?

FredM wrote in post #11452862
i wish I would have learned something in that time. I wanted an SLR back in 2005 but ended up getting a point and shoot which is what the DSLR I am buying now will replace.

If it helps, I plan to first use this camera for single person portraits outdoors with minimal to some background. Which lens would be best for that right off the bat?
Something like this.

| Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

I know there are depth of field and other considerations with this type of pic so don't get bogged down into the details of that exact shot but that is what I plan to do with the new camera right off the bat as far as distance and amount of background.

get the 18-55IS with the camera, it's an inexpensive sharp "walk around" lens and the 50mm 1.8 ($100) - great for portraits

FredM wrote in post #11452915
So between the two kit lens I should get the 135mm correct?

no! - don't get the 18-135 !

I'd say "quit saying kit lens". Your lens is the primary determination of quality. If you have any plans to sell your images, don't get a kit lens at all. Get the best glass you can afford.

FredM wrote in post #11452915
So between the two kit lens I should get the 135mm correct?

No.
You've asked what I thought were two questions, but maybe it's only one.

If you are deciding between the 18-55 IS and the 18-135, get the 18-55 IS on image quality grounds. It's "good", the 18-135 is "bad".

If you want the best lens for the type of work you want to do from day one, get one of the lenses from the list I gave (possibly in addition to the 18-55 IS, which would be used in "walk-around" situations).

With the 18-55 IS alone however, you should be able to achieve results similar to the example you have shown with careful selection of shooting location (distant background, etc).

I'd also endorse watt100's suggestion of a 50/1.8 as a way of extending the abilities of the 18-55 IS as far as your portraiture is concerned. It's fast enough to give you some decent background blur, long enough to enable you to work from a distance where the perspective will be flattering, and it's inexpensive. The downside is that it is a bit fragile and many dislike its bokeh.
(P.S. - other downsides to the 50/1.8 - slow AF, noisy, and poor AF in low light)

I would go with the 18-55mm IS over the 18-135mm IS. The 18-135mm has more distortion at the wide end and it doesn't have the awesome close focusing capability of the 18-55mm. YMMV.

xarqi wrote in post #11453012
No.
You've asked what I thought were two questions, but maybe it's only one.

If you are deciding between the 18-55 IS and the 18-135, get the 18-55 IS on image quality grounds. It's "good", the 18-135 is "bad".

If you want the best lens for the type of work you want to do from day one, get one of the lenses from the list I gave (possibly in addition to the 18-55 IS, which would be used in "walk-around" situations).

With the 18-55 IS alone however, you should be able to achieve results similar to the example you have shown with careful selection of shooting location (distant background, etc).

Thanks for clearing that up. I was thinking to get the 50mm as so many people recommended it and it is inexpensive.

OK I am pretty excited now. Just ordered the package with the 18-55 and added the Normal EF 50mm f/1.8 II lens. First test will be Christmas portraits and snapshots.