Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: kit lens vs exp lens...(not to trigger lens war ar..dun get e wrong idea!!!)

  1. #21

    Default Re: kit lens vs exp lens...(not to trigger lens war ar..dun get e wrong idea!!!)

    Yup kit lens is enough for most of us. But compared to a pro F/2.8 zoom, you are missing
    1)F/2.8 = Better bokeh
    2)F/2.8 = More light enters the camera, thus a brighter view finder
    3)F/2.8 = Allows the camera to auto focus in even lower light conditions.
    4)Faster autofocusing (in most cases)
    5)Much more weather resistant(in weather sealed pro zooms)
    6)Better build quality=higher chance of working after drops. (something a kit lens cannot take much)
    7)Nikon's gold band or Canon's red band
    8)Assurance it would work for at least 5 years.(most non-lemoned good quality lens)

    For a small handful of us who loves ultra wide angle to play with perspective or certain genre of photography like birding, you cant use a kit lens for that, even a 1000mm mirror lens isnt enough or so my friend say.

    There are many genre of photography that requires special lens like macro,birding,sports. Its important to know what you want so that you dont spend unnecessary money. Personally I like ultra wide and ultra tele, but I do events too, so currently i have a f/2.8 zoom(tamron sadly)and a lens that give me 450mm equivilent on 35mm film. But saving up for an ultra wide. In my case i wouldnt go near a macro lens, but thats just me. Hope this helps you.

  2. #22

    Default Re: kit lens vs exp lens...(not to trigger lens war ar..dun get e wrong idea!!!)

    yo bro..regardin e point 3 u mentioned..
    "3)F/2.8 = Allows the camera to auto focus in even lower light conditions"

    er...i was reading a thread...i think...(if i didn't remember wrongly)...it mentions that tamron 17-50mm F2.8 got problem huntin during low light condition...
    then regardin e point u mention...so...wat is it actually?..
    kindly simplify it ya..
    cheers!

  3. #23

    Default Re: kit lens vs exp lens...(not to trigger lens war ar..dun get e wrong idea!!!)

    Basically, its not a pro F/2.8 zoom. Its more of a economical F/2.8 zoom that is designed to be small and cheap, and that comes with sacrifices. One of them is poor AF compared to Nikons SWM and Canons USM. No one complains about Canon's EF-S 17-55 F/2.8 IS or Nikon's DX AF-S 17-55mm F/2.8 autofocus unless that person has high expectation of the lens or he/she got a bad copy. Infact lots of people says high praises about their AF speed and accuracy.

    But the tamron compared to a kit lens might autofocus slower, but it would take more light in, thus should be able to autofocus in slightly dimmer conditions than a kit lens, but i have yet to try that out what i said in this sentance is just theory.

  4. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Balestier
    Posts
    53

    Default Re: kit lens vs exp lens...(not to trigger lens war ar..dun get e wrong idea!!!)

    Basically people who have seen "the light" in a more expensive lens probably don't want to go back to using the kit lens. I have friends who get better lenses and after that sell off their kit lens or keep it in storage for if and when they choose to upgrade their kit and want to sell their body and kit lens together as a set.

    As for me, I can honestly say I haven't touched my kit lens since I got my 24-105L. Why would I want to anyway? Heh.

    I have seen the Lighter side of Canon photographic equipment.
    50D | 400D | 24-105L | 55-250IS | 50 1.8 | 580EXII | flickr

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •