hariku821

I can get a brand new XSI (body only) for $454 or I can get it with a kit lens for $560. I'm just wondering if the lens is really worth that or can I get a better lens for <150.

To start off i just want a lens that is decent all around and then i will get specialized lenses as time goes on.

Thanks

B.R.I.C.K.

I got a T2i with the 18-55 kit lens. My coworker got a 50D body and the "nifty fifty" separately for $99. After playing with both for a bit, I find the 50/1.8 to be a far better bang for the buck. I understand now what people mean when they say the kit lens is good for what it is. It will give you the 18-55 range, and something to play with, but I have found its a bit inconsistent in IQ and focus. The 50/1.8 was much more consistent shot to shot.
Personally, if I had $100 to spend on a lens, I'd get the 50. It will give you something to use until you get a higher quality zoom, and you won't toss it in the back of your closet when you get a new lens (which I already know I'll probably do with the kit lens)
SPEND on glass, bodies will come and go...

NFRs2000NYC

The kit lens is worthless IMHO. Save the money, and either get a Tamron 17-50 or if you can't afford it right away, get the 50mm 1.8

Ted H

zet

No, not worth it.

zet

Sorry let me elaborate. $100 would be put more to use when investing toward another lens, tripod, or flash. The price to quality ratio of that lens is just not worth it compared to the stuff I listed. If you want a really nice walk around lens, I suggest the Tamron suggested or the Sigma 17-70. I think the Tamron stays at constant aperture and the sigma is 2.8 at 17mm. Both will offer much better quality in all aspects and you will notice it right away.

Good luck!

NFRs2000NYC

If you can afford the Tamron 17-50, get it. If not, you may want to rethink your purchase of an SLR, as they are worse than a good point and shoot if you don't invest in good glass.