nikon kit lens

[Alyssa15267]

Is the kit lens worth keeping?
What are the pros & cons?

 

[tirediron]

Absolutely - the main pro is: It's a lens! Seriously, while kit lenses might not be quite as good as top-end pro glass, they're pretty darn good, and in most situations (decent light, not shooting into the sun, etc), it will be all but impossible to tell the difference between it and a $2200 lens! It is slower (lets in less light), and doesn't have the build quality of the $2200 lens, but, it's most definitely worth keeping and using the heck out of!

 

[Alyssa15267]

I like my kit lens but sometimes i feel lil its not fast enough..but i really do like it a lot

 

[nerwin]

I like my kit lens but sometimes i feel lil its not fast enough..but i really do like it a lot

Which kit lens do you have? The 18-55 is pretty good honestly, its sharp and has a useful range. Few years ago when I bought a D7000, it came with the 18-105 in which I broke the lens mount! Its just plastic and that's the downside of these cheaper kit lenses so my advice is to stay away from plastic mounts. The Nikon 18-140 is a decent little kit lens which uses a metal mount. I think the old 18-70 3.5-4.5 uses a metal mount too. So those are good options. Most people don't break the 18-55's mount because its such a light and small lens..but the 18-105 has some weight and one little hit was all it took to break! Optically..nothing wrong with them.

I'd say, keep it and pick up the 35 1.8G! You'll love it.

 

[JacaRanda]

Is the kit lens worth keeping?
What are the pros & cons?

You should use the lens often enough to determine your own pros and cons. Then decide on your own, if it's worth keeping.

 

[AKUK]

Pretty much the only draw back to kit lenses in general is the maximum aperture and focus speed on some. Other than that, most are actually very good optically when stopped down. The 18-55mm has always been a good performer. I enjoyed the 18-105mm which I used on the Nikon D90.

Obviously they aren't that great in low light situations and are more prone to hunt due to their slower maximum aperture but a lot of those problems can be overcome with a tripod. Not all, but a lot. As Tirediron rightly says, a lens is a lens. It's what you do with it that counts more than anything.

I'd suggest learning photography with your kit lens because of the flexibility it offers. Develop your photographic eye in terms of interesting subject matter and learn about composition. Pay attention to backgrounds and actually observe what light is doing. That is the biggest obstacle beginners face. Because we are so used to seeing light in various forms every day, we switch off to it. It's omnipresent and as such we tend not to scrutinize it. That's why we end up with the snapshots of people squinting and dark shadows under their eyes. Rather than looking at how the light was interacting with the subject, we became solely engrossed in the subject matter and got heinous results and probably a tree sticking out their head too.

Once you are taking solid shots with the kit lens and you start hitting upon obstacles and are genuinely being limited by your equipment, then upgrade to something a bit more specialized. Avoid the temptation to purchase every focal length lens to cover every scenario. It's a waste of money for the most part and some lenses will just sit in your kit bag rarely if ever used as a result.

 

[MRnats]

One day I decided to sell the kit lens. That same day I went back and looked through pics of my trip to Miami and thought "I really love my (first prime i purchased) 35mm 1.8G". Then i noticed all the pics were shot with the kit lens and not the 35mm like I thought. From that day on I decided to always keep the kit lens. Now that I bought a D7100 and kept my D5100, the kit is going on the D5100 for my wife to learn on.

 

[greybeard]

Nikon's plastic mount kit lenses are a testament to making something as inexpensive as possible while still maintaining good image quality. I did however, sell my 18-105 that came with my D7000 as I replaced it with a 16-85. After using the 16-85 for quite some time now I can honestly say that it isn't any sharper than the 18-105 and if I had it to do over I would have just kept the 18-105 and been happy with it.

 

[wfooshee]

My 18-55 came used with the D50 I bought used in 2007. It and the SB-600 speedlight are all I have left from that original bag. I'm on my second upgrade since then in the body, and I've gotten a variety of glass, but unless I'm doing something very specific, or shooting wildlife (which brings out the 70-300) the 18-55 lives on the camera. Other lenses are for speed, or reach, or in the case of the fisheye, a special effect, but for general purpose shooting, that first kit lens still scores.

 

[Karsyn Taelyr]

Keep! It's a lens! I kept my kit lens and it's nice to pull out every so often!

 

[bigal1000]

Nikon's plastic mount kit lenses are a testament to making something as inexpensive as possible while still maintaining good image quality. I did however, sell my 18-105 that came with my D7000 as I replaced it with a 16-85. After using the 16-85 for quite some time now I can honestly say that it isn't any sharper than the 18-105 and if I had it to do over I would have just kept the 18-105 and been happy with it.

I find just the opposite to be true my 16-85 is razor sharp compared to any other kit lens I have had but that is just what I see.

 

[bigal1000]

I like my kit lens but sometimes i feel lil its not fast enough..but i really do like it a lot

If you like the kit lens keep it or buy a fast lens ie, Nikon 24-70 2.8 etc,. Do you really need me to tell you what you should buy ?

 

[AKUK]

I had the 18-105mm VR on the D90. Stopped down to f/8-f/11 it was very sharp. It was a great lens to learn on. I've since sold it to help fund more expensive/faster aperture glass but, for a kit lens, I was pretty impressed with it.

 

[bribrius]

Depends on how and what you shoot. There is no avoiding the fact that good glass makes a difference. But you can turn out some real crap photos with good glass. They just might be razor sharp crap photos. And you may actually want them less sharp and a little softer in some situations and find yourself post processing to make that happen, while your kit lens would have turned it out naturally. Other thing is, the more people post process, the less important it becomes how or what with the shot was taken. If you are tweaking a image heavily anyway, by the time you are done much of what the shot was taken with isn't apparent anyway. That is the part i could never figure out. when someone buys high end glass then tweaks a photo so much it really didn't make a difference what shot it.

odd isn't it.