60d lens kit vs 60d body + better lens

[tmartin2347]

The title says it all, I'm debating whether or not I would be better off getting the 60d body and get and spend the extra money for a better lens rather just settle with a lens kit.
I want tack sharp photos and I'm thinking I will be much happier with spending the extra for a better lens. I always ready people saying that you should invest in good glass to get the most from your camera.

What do you think?

I also have a lens I'm looking at for possible purchase.

Canon ef-s 15-85 f/3.5-5.6mm is usm

Anyone have or used one? I love outdoor photography the most.

 

[dxqcanada2 1]

If you can afford it ... get the best lens you can.

 

[Samerr9]

I have the 60D with the kit lens + 50mm 1.4

I don't say the kit lens is bad.. but 95% of my time I use the 50mm. I am more into portraits and I like the depth of feild and low light capabilities especially at 2.8. I don't regret buying the kit lens but if i have the chance I would have got either a better lens or a flash for that money..

 

[D-B-J]

For me, when i first got my dslr, i needed the kit lens. It was an 18-135mm, and let me work on my knowledge about photography, and grow as a photographer. Gradually i became limited by the lens, the aperture, and the optical issues. So i graduated, bought new and better lenses, and sold that one. Personally, i'd reccomend starting off with a kit lens as a noob, and growing from there. If you already know what you plan to photograph, then just get the body and the best lens you can afford.

Regards,
Jake

 

[WesternGuy]

You are facing the same dilemma that I faced when I bought my 5D about 4 years ago - body or body + kit lens. I would take the advice of dxqcanada - always get the best glass that you can afford as camera bodies will come and go (I am on my second digital body, waiting for the 5DMk III to arrive), but glass is forever, well almost forever. I bought the body + kit lens when I bought my first DSLR, but I would never do that again as it wasn't the best lens in the shop, but I was just starting out in digital and it was okay to learn with and the price was right, besides, I had a couple of good lenses from my film days that also worked on the camera and they were good glass, at least 20 years ago they were good glass and still are, it is just that today's glass is so much better. I don't know if this helps you or not, but in the final analysis, only you can really know what is best for you. If you are just starting into digital, then the kit lens is probably okay to go with, on the other hand, if you have been at digital for a while, then I would suggest you get the body and then shop around for better glass.

Cheers,

WesternGuy

 

[Drake]

I assume you are talking about the Canon 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 IS lens. For me this lens breaks the stereotype of bad kit lens. It really is one hell of improvement after the previous soft non-IS kit from Canon. In tests it is often about as sharp as the much more expensive 18-135 and 17-85. I also have one and am very happy with it.

My advice? Get your camera with the kit lens, it adds almost nothing to the price. If you don't like it, you can always upgrade, but unless you get a really bad copy, you'll have to get something like the 17-55 2.8 to really see a big difference.

 

[KmH]

I want tack sharp photos

Canon ef-s 15-85 f/3.5-5.6mm is usm

Anyone have or used one? I love outdoor photography the most.

Tack sharp focus comes down to several factors including the quality of the lens you use. How Do I Use My Digital SLR? - How To Get Sharply Focused Images.
The Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM UD Wide Angle Zoom Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras is not one of Canon's L-Series of lenses and is more a mid-level type of lens, but it does have the USM focus motor so focus speed should be very good.

The f/3.5-5.6 variable aperture range can be limiting in low light situations.

You could save $275 bucks by getting the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 Image Stabilized USM SLR Lens for EOS Digital SLR's

But then, 85 mm is a bit short for wildlife and such and it may be worth giving some up on the wide angle end for more reach with the Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras

Just saying outdoor photography leaves a lot of room for interpretation, making it difficult to make more specific recommendations.

 

[tyler_h]

28 at the wide end is bad for only lens... 44.8 equ... and assuming outdoor involves any landscapes...

I got the standard kit lens with my 550D and the most annoying thing to me is the lack of a focus scale... I shoot a lot at night and its hard enough to hyperfocal for landscape in the day (pick object about right distance away, change to manual) let alone at night (turn sloppy ring until it might be close).

Outdoor will also mean available light I take it... and day time you'll have no problems with a slow variable aperture most of the time (DOF considerations aside) but accessories may/will come into it at some point regardless of what you are shooting.

Are you set on the 60D? Maybe consider at 550D and have a bit more to spend on lenses and accessories like cable releases, filters, tripods etc etc