Moonrise & Aurora

Moonrise & Aurora

by Jakub

submit your photo


Picture of the Week Themes
Suggest and vote on themes

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Tell me more ×
Photography Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional, enthusiast and amateur photographers. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I am planning to buy a DSLR soon.

Before I zero in on the model, I want to know whether it is advisable to buy a kit (body + 18-55 lens) or not? OR should I go for the camera-body and the lens separately?

share|improve this question
Especially with Rebel bodies, sometimes the kit price with the 18-55 is lower than the body only price from certain sellers like amazon.com – Michael Clark Mar 27 at 10:41

9 Answers

up vote 17 down vote accepted

The answer is, unfortunately, depends.

First, what kit are we talking about? The 5D Mark II kit comes with the 24-105mm f4 IS L lens. The lens is roughly $1000 new, so selling it immediately, gives you discount on the body itself, so it absolutely makes sense to get the kit (unless you don't want to hassle with selling the lens). I bought the 5d2 kit, even though I already had a great copy of the 24-105 (I kept my original and sold the new one) However the 24-105 f4 IS L lens is a great general purpose zoom, so I would think twice before selling it. In kit your looking at, the 18-55mm Zoom lens isn't that all great of a lens. It works, but there are a number of drawbacks. The lens costs $170 new, but you will have a harder time selling that lens for that price.

Next, what is your budget? If you can afford a better lens, then you should buy a better lens. Lens are far more important than camera bodies. However, having no lens is way way way worse than having a "bad" lens. So if you need the 18-55mm range, and can't afford the step-up alternatives (or even the 3rd party alternatives), then get the kit lens.

Finally, what other goodies are you getting with the kit? If you search, you can find kits that also come with bags, memory cards, a filter, 2nd batteries, cleaners, etc. If you don't have these items already, they will add up quickly. Having them thrown into the kit will generally reduce your total cost.

share|improve this answer
thanks! What is a good place to search for those kits that you mentioned? I am looking at the Canon site and their kit just has a body and a lens and nothing else. – Lazer Aug 4 '10 at 6:30
@Lazer: I recommend checking out the big online retailers: BH Photo Video, Canoga Camera, and Adorama (although Adorama is a distant 3rd, in my opinion). I've purchased from all three, and all three are reputable sellers. – Alan Aug 4 '10 at 8:10
4  
Be very Careful with those kits that include "everything". Sometimes they are no saving at all, or even result more expensive as some kits are simple bundles that stores put together to sell really cheap (usually "generic") accessories for a slightly higher price. It's not always the case, but happens. – Jahaziel May 28 '12 at 14:54

The only time I would argue for not buying a kit is when you already own other lenses that cover the same focal range. If you are purchasing your first DSLR you should go ahead and get the kit. Even though the kit lenses have a bad reputation, it's been said that "99% of lenses are better than 99% of photographers", and the kit lens is going to be a great deal.

share|improve this answer
15  
Furthermore, when you've just got your first DSLR, many times it's best to just play with it for a while to get an idea what kind of lens would you want to spend (perhaps more signifant) money on. – che Jul 18 '10 at 17:25

When I first did it, I bought a body and a separate zoom lens. If I were to do it again, I think I would do the same thing, but get a 50m prime lens.

Why?
Every camera company offers a 50m prime lens that is inexpensive, so it's a great buy when you are first starting out. The other reason is overload of information. When you first start out, the camera body has a bunch of settings and modes and options that are all new to you. You need time to figure them all out and to get comfortable with using the equipment. Keeping something in the equation of taking pictures simple, by having a prime lens instead of a zoom, helps you to focus (sorry no pun intended) your attention on the important parts.

share|improve this answer
2  
I have to agree on this. Once I got my 50mm prime it helped to really focus me on learning manual settings. Also since prime lens are fixed usually they can put better glass in side, for a better picture. – percent20 Jul 18 '10 at 14:27
2  
On the other hand, if it's a APS-C body, 50mm is a bit telephoto for a general-purpose lens. But the point stands - you can also get dirt-cheap 30-35mm primes for APS-C bodies. – Reid Jul 19 '10 at 2:25

Think about it this way: would you buy the kit lens if it was standalone? For example, if you needed a lens near the 18-55mm range, would you buy the kit version (which is generally of a fairly low build quality, fairly slow with a variable aperture) or would you buy something a bit more professional?

If you see no problems with the kit lens and would buy it standalone, get the kit. On the other hand if you'd probably opt for a different lens... don't get the kit and instead spend your money on what you really want.

share|improve this answer

I understand that you are talking about:

  • Canon 500D body only vs Canon 500D + 18-55 IS lens.

For that combination I believe it is worth buying the kit. The price difference is minimal and actually if you find that you want to change/upgrade the lens you will easily sell the 18-55IS for the price that will cover the difference.

Also Canon 18-55 IS is not such a bad lens optically and it also offers image stabilisation. The build quality is indeed not too good but it is definitely worth the price also the financial consequences of braking it are not too big neither.

Upgrade in the same focal range would be EF-S 17-55IS 2.8 but that is in completely different league in terms of price.

If I were you I would get the kit and 50mm 1.8 - the kit as a walk-around and simply to learn what focal range works for you best, the 50mm for portraits and photos in low light situations and also to find out if you really need a faster zoom with better optics.

Here are some reviews of the lenses I mentioned

Because of their price/performance ratio those are perfect lenses for the begginer and should work great on the 500D body that you are planning to buy

share|improve this answer
thanks! – Lazer Aug 4 '10 at 6:32

I usually dont get the kit lenses. They're not always the best quality. I feel like they're offered as a way to get people up and running with a new body, without having to buy other stuff.

share|improve this answer

It is nearly always a good idea to buy the kit. First of all, you may be able to find a kit with the lens you really want - the kits are not always just the 18-55mm lens. You also might find that the manufacturers discount a body + lens purchase pretty significantly. For example, right now Nikon is offering rebates of up to $400 with a body + lens purchase.

So I would first look and see if you can find the body + lens combination you would want anyway. Even if you can't find it, you may be able to find a package with another lens that you could sell to someone else (the 18-55mm might be a tough one to sell, since nearly everyone who wants it already has it)

share|improve this answer

Generally speaking, unless you are buying a high-end kit with a top of the line camera body, the bundled lenses (particularly 18-55mm lenses) that come with your entry-level camera bodies are not worth it. If you can find a kit that includes a reasonably decent mid-grade or top-grade lens, I would go for it. However, if your buying a kit that includes the bottom of the barrel lens (which the 18-55mm usually is), you are MUCH better off buying the body only, and saving for a more decent lens.

This might also be beneficial if you know the kind of photography work you wish to do, as 18mm is an ultra-wide focal length, and does not offer much unless you are looking to do a lot of landscape photography. A more useful focal range is 24-135, and any lens in that range will be much more useful from a general photography standpoint. The wide-normal lengths are useful for landscape, photojournalism, and other general forms of photography, while the 100mm and 135mm telephoto lengths are excellent for portraits and the like.

share|improve this answer
1  
I disagree with the generalization. The 18-55 retails for only about $100, and is well worth that as a first lens. My 50D came with their 28-135, and I found that on a crop sensor body, it was far too long. I bought a 18-55 explicitly for the extra ten mm of wide angle use. Sure, its not much of a lens, but $100 is not much money either. – Pat Farrell May 28 '12 at 23:20
I agree with your first paragraph but I think you are way off on that ultra-wide 18mm. It is not ultrawide on the camera in question (APS-C). You will use 18mm for Landscape but also Indoor and Group photos. Incidentially, 18-55 gets you the same fov as 29-90mm on FF, so your suggested 24-135 is wider and closer on FF. – Unapiedra Dec 27 '12 at 21:12
With the Rebel bodies at times the kit price with the 18-55 is less than the body only price from some sellers. – Michael Clark Mar 27 at 10:39

If you find a kit that suits you, that is generally cheaper than buying the body and lens separately. If you buy them separately you get to choose whatever lens you want for the body.

Lenses in a kit (except for the most expensive cameras) is usually one of the cheapest models, and as they are sold in kits they can manufacture a lot of them at lower cost. So, you get a cheap lens, but at a good price.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.