New lens, big difference

Hill202 · Sep 13, 2007

To the experts on here, this will be stating the obvious, but maybe it will help a beginner like me. I took the plunge and bought a Nikon 70-300 vr lens. What a difference in my pictures!! The blur is gone and the tripod is put away ( until its time for HDR). I read all the comments, good and bad about this lens and decided to try it out. Its on a D40 body and I could not be happier.

I originally purchased a package deal with the D40 with a 18-55 and a 55-200 kit lens. I could have done without the 55-200 lens. I can see still using the wide angle lens for landscapes ( with a tripod). I guess for me buying a body only camera would have made more sense.

Sideburns · Sep 13, 2007

I found that out the hard way as well...I haven't touched the kit lens since I got my 50. Even for wide angle it's not worth it...just doesn't look the same quality...

The VR is a great feature. I wanted to get IS in my L, but unfortunately I didn't have the money...gotta go pick it up today, actually.

Lenses really do make or break the camera.

Big Mike · Sep 13, 2007

Just wait until you try a high quality lens with a large aperture...

Hill202 · Sep 13, 2007

Sideburns said:
I found that out the hard way as well...I haven't touched the kit lens since I got my 50. Even for wide angle it's not worth it...just doesn't look the same quality...

The VR is a great feature. I wanted to get IS in my L, but unfortunately I didn't have the money...gotta go pick it up today, actually.

Lenses really do make or break the camera.

In other words, I won't be able to "give" the kit lens away :grumpy:

Sweetsomedays · Sep 13, 2007

I don't use my kit lens at all. I wish I could sell it. There is a lady about to get a D40 and in some kind of package deal from walmart on this board I frequent. I am trying to convince her jus to get the body.

Big Mike · Sep 13, 2007

The kit lenses get a bad rep. They really aren't all that bad. Especially for the price.

sabbath999 · Sep 13, 2007

Sweetsomedays said:
I don't use my kit lens at all. I wish I could sell it. There is a lady about to get a D40 and in some kind of package deal from walmart on this board I frequent. I am trying to convince her jus to get the body.

I may be wrong, but I don't think the D40 is sold in the US with a US Warranty without the kit lens.

Sweetsomedays · Sep 14, 2007

Really! I did not know that. Good bit of information...thanks

Garbz · Sep 14, 2007

Kit lenses are normally very sharp. They just lack in the aperture, and definitely in the build quality. I'm perfectly happy with mine and I resisted upgrading to a much more expensive lens with VR simply because of how sharp the current one is.

droyz2000 · Sep 14, 2007

I would have to agree with Garbz, I still use my kit lens. You just have to know when and when you cannot use it. Low light settings, I cannot. Most normal daytime shooting, I can get very sharp clear pictures.

Mike_E · Sep 14, 2007

Ditto, I've got a Nikon 18-70 AF-S That was sold as a kit on my D200 that is every bit as sharp as other Nikon lenses that were rated 4/4.5 out of 5 by people who were supposed to know. I love this lens! I used to prefer tele-zooms but if I'm walking out of the house any more with just one lens, this is the one I usually take.

I can't speak for Canon or others but Nikon seems to skimp on the build quality but not on the optics in it's Kit lenses (the 18-55 anyway, my 18-70 is pretty solid). I suspect that being generally intelligent folks the manufacturers would understand that if their cameras don't take quality photos out of the box then they will loose market share quickly.

gordon77 · Sep 14, 2007

i have a canon 400d with the 17-85 kit and it rocks. like droyz2000 said you have to know when to use it. i does suck in low light but if you keep the apeture btw f8-f14 in the day its sharp as anything...

WDodd · Sep 14, 2007

I agree with Garbz as well. I use my kit all the time I am sure it will get less use though once I get a 17-50 f/2.8.

Mo's Photos · Sep 14, 2007

WDodd,

I think you'll be shocked at the difference between the kit lens and the AF-S 17-55 2.8. I was very pleased with the results from my 18-55 kit lens and 75-300 4-5.6 for quite a while. Then I got the almost L quality AF-S 17-55 and was amazed at the difference. About two weeks ago I got the 70-200 2.8L and again was shocked. I didn't think that it would be much if any improvement over the AF-S, but it is. The difference isn't as noticeable as the change between the kit lens and the AF-S, but it is there.

Antithesis · Sep 16, 2007

I'll probably get a fast prime lens here pretty soon, my buddy's been shooting with a 1.4 or 1.7 (forget what he said) 50mm and said it is phenomenally better. I think that will be my next lens.