Entry level DSLR's lens kit == crappy?

[VictorChan]

In general, are the lens kit included with some of the entry level DSLR camera are less than good? The lens on my S3 is 6mm to 72mm focal length, with IS and Ultrasonic motor. f/2.7-3.5. I was looking at some of the DSLR lens with the similar spec. Aren't they expensive? In the $500+ range. The lens kit included is usually in the 18mm to 55mm focal lenght, f/3.5-5.5. Has no IS and Ultrasonic motor.

 

[Grentz]

The kit lenses are usually just ok. They are not the best, but they are fairly good and good enough for most people.

Now that is on the entry level DSLRs only...the higher end DSLR kits will come with better lenses.

Remember though, there are many levels of lenses and not everyone will be able to tell the difference in quality...even the kit lens is usually going to be a big step up from any P&S type camera.

Lenses are just a hard thing, there are good and bad ones out there and even better and worse copies of the same lens. Luckily most people would not be able to tell the difference even if they used both. Usually skill will be the bottleneck, not the lens.

 

[VictorChan]

Thanks. I am tempting to get a true DSLR camera. It seems that my S3 may perform much better taking indoor shots with lower light than using the lens kit included with the entry level DSLR camera. I would assume a lens with f/3.5-5.5 would have trouble getting the right exposure over the ones with f/2?

The kit lenses are usually just ok. They are not the best, but they are fairly good and good enough for most people.

Now that is on the entry level DSLRs only...the higher end DSLR kits will come with better lenses.

Remember though, there are many levels of lenses and not everyone will be able to tell the difference in quality...even the kit lens is usually going to be a big step up from any P&S type camera.

Lenses are just a hard thing, there are good and bad ones out there and even better and worse copies of the same lens. Luckily most people would not be able to tell the difference even if they used both.

 

[Grentz]

Thanks. I am tempting to get a true DSLR camera. It seems that my S3 may perform much better taking indoor shots with lower light than using the lens kit included with the entry level DSLR camera. I would assume a lens with f/3.5-5.5 would have trouble getting the right exposure over the ones with f/2?

yes...but its not impossible to do. I have no lenses under f/4.0 and I still can get very good low light results.

 

[s10010001]

Thanks. I am tempting to get a true DSLR camera. It seems that my S3 may perform much better taking indoor shots with lower light than using the lens kit included with the entry level DSLR camera. I would assume a lens with f/3.5-5.5 would have trouble getting the right exposure over the ones with f/2?

I doubt that. the Kit lens seems to be a tad slower than the S3 f2.7 Lens, but the high ISO preformence of the DSLR will be be much great and make up for that extra stop real quick.

Do your research, and read read read. You may want to look at a Rebel XTi and a cheaper 3rd party lens from Sigma, or tamron.

 

[Grentz]

an remember you can buy the body only and then add your own lens...but generally the kit lens is a great lens to learn on and use for average everyday shots.

 

[darktiger]

Get one then put something like a 50mm f/1.8 then you will have a good low light lens.

 

[Kevlarman]

The high ISO performance of dSLRs absolutely kills point and shoot cameras.
There is no comparison.

Unless we're talking Fuji F30 or F31fd.