Is the kit lens for the new Canon 40d any good?

[jcanon701]

or should i just use the money for another general purpose lens... which one..

[sunnythepsychocat]

or should i just use the money for another general purpose lens... which one..
I would get either 28-135/f3.5-5.6 IS or 24-105/f4 IS as good general lens.
Also, 50/f1.8 is another good prime lens to have.

[fractalgfx]

or should i just use the money for another general purpose lens... which one..

You should be more specific. For people general purpose includes everything from macro photography to bird watching. For others general purpose is a 50mm prime that they can use in any lighting conditions.

I briefly considered getting a super zoom when I bought my XTi, but I eventually went with the 17-55 F2.8 IS. I can't use it to shoot birds, but I can use it to take pictures that would require a flash with a slower non stabilized lens.

They won't admit it, but I think there are a lot of guys who secretly, wouldn't mind owning the sigma 18-200 OS. A picture taken with a low quality lens will always surpass the picture you didn't take because your subject was too far or too close.

[shoey]

They won't admit it, but I think there are a lot of guys who secretly, wouldn't mind owning the sigma 18-200 OS. A picture taken with a low quality lens will always surpass the picture you didn't take because your subject was too far or too close.

Whilst i agree with this to a certain degree, there is also the flipside, that when the shooting oppertunity arises that falls within a quality lens' focal length, a picture taken with a quality lens will surpass the picture from a do-it-all lens.

Just being diplomatic:D

[mcenut]

Is the kit lens for the new Canon 40d any good?

Simple answer. NO! But what is your budget like? For less than $100, the kit lens is a good bargain.

A good zoom lens, not great, will start at around $400 (US) and climb from there. The Canon 28-135mm is a good lens, but not as wide as the kit lens. For me, wide isn't the problem. I have a Canon 17-40mm f/4 that I rarely use because it is too wide for my tastes. The Canon 50mm f/1.4 is my favorite lens and spends the majority of its time on my camera. I took my 100mm f/2.8 macro lens to the zoo one day at it provided great results even when it was too long (I just took a few steps back.)

There are also lenses from Sigma and Tamron. You will find lots of users here that will rave about them. I personally don't stray from the Canon line.

[Gintaras]

mcenut, you just confirm that the lens range is a personal issue. for me wide is indespensible, for you this is not. hence our lens idea would be different. the major issue with the lens is what range you use the most, not what lens is the coolest.

[Need4Spd]

It really is a matter of what you will be shooting, so mainly it's a matter of personal preference. But as far as good lens for the money, the kit lens with the 40D is fine for many uses. But if you will be wanting to shoot low light without a flash (for me, a main purpose of using a DSLR over a PNS), the relatively fast, f2.8 17-55 with IS is my top choice, though heavy and pricey. And you get f2.8 throughout the zoom range. For dramatic wide angle shots, I use a 10-22mm 3.5-4.5. For me, that covers about 90% of what I use my DSLR for. I have a 75-300mm f4.5-5.6 that's not image stabilized, but I hardly use it.

[JTL]

They won't admit it, but I think there are a lot of guys who secretly, wouldn't mind owning the sigma 18-200 OS. A picture taken with a low quality lens will always surpass the picture you didn't take because your subject was too far or too close.Hey! I own it!

And I'll admit it!

It's my "hiking lens" standard. When you're traveling fast over rough terrain you need to travel light...and changing lenses is not on the program.

The right lens for the right reason. But, I totally agree with you...lens snobbery is even more common than ADD these days! But, if Canon would stop being stupid and come out with an 18-200 IS...I'd order it before the ink was dry on the announcement. Guess I'm kind of a snob as well! :D:D:D

[RichNY]

I considered one of those type convenience lenses but decided the better solution for me was to leave the 10-22 on the 30D and take along an S3IS when I want to travel light and not change glass while picking up IS at 2x the focal length.

[24Peter]

Hey! I own it!

And I'll admit it!



I've got one too. I've only had mine a few weeks and generally like it very much. But I am noticing some severe focus issues with it on my 40D. I'm going to send it in for calibration next week.

I'd also be interested in a Canon offering in this range, but assume they wouldn't make it too nice since it would potentially knock off several other of their lenses.

Curious: Why is the 24-105 F4 L IS not enough for you?

[JTL]

Curious: Why is the 24-105 F4 L IS not enough for you?Simple. Because 38mm is just not wide enough. If I had a full frame camera, then it would be a different story...the 24-105 would be my one lens solution. But for now, with a crop camera, on "one lens days", the 18-200 is the ticket.

When I'm out doing serious shooting, for now I'm carrying the 10-22 and the 24-105.