Could I survive without a kit lens?
Discussion
I have a Canon 550D and a dead kit lens which leaves a bit of a dilemma.
I already have a 10-22 and love it, but that and the 18-55 kit lens were my only lenses.
I thought about a 'better' direct alternative to the kit lens, perhaps a Tamron 17-50.
Then I thought for about the same money, a kit lens + a Canon 55-250 would give me more range. I've been considering a longer zoom for a while anyway.
Finally, I thought why not just get a 55-250 and forget the kit lens?
I shoot a variety of street shots, car stuff and landscapes so I think I might be able to get away with just a 10-22 and 55-250.
It leaves a reasonable-sized gap in my range, but as the kit isnt exactly the pinnacle of lenses, is it even worth getting a replacement, or should I get the IMO much better 55-250 and survive without the kit lens?
A random pair of lenses to have I guess, but a workable if not perfect pair. What do you think?
I already have a 10-22 and love it, but that and the 18-55 kit lens were my only lenses.
I thought about a 'better' direct alternative to the kit lens, perhaps a Tamron 17-50.
Then I thought for about the same money, a kit lens + a Canon 55-250 would give me more range. I've been considering a longer zoom for a while anyway.
Finally, I thought why not just get a 55-250 and forget the kit lens?
I shoot a variety of street shots, car stuff and landscapes so I think I might be able to get away with just a 10-22 and 55-250.
It leaves a reasonable-sized gap in my range, but as the kit isnt exactly the pinnacle of lenses, is it even worth getting a replacement, or should I get the IMO much better 55-250 and survive without the kit lens?
A random pair of lenses to have I guess, but a workable if not perfect pair. What do you think?
I've never had a 'kit' lens.
I did have the 17-55 on the 7d which was ace. I didnt have any normal walkround on the 350d (just a 10-20, 50 etc).
I dont have a 'walk round/ kit lens on the 5d2 either. I prefer primes mostly these days.
A 10-20 with a 30-50mm prime would be fine - depends what you shoot.
I did have the 17-55 on the 7d which was ace. I didnt have any normal walkround on the 350d (just a 10-20, 50 etc).
I dont have a 'walk round/ kit lens on the 5d2 either. I prefer primes mostly these days.
A 10-20 with a 30-50mm prime would be fine - depends what you shoot.
I'll agree you don't need every focal length covered, but imo, 22-55 is right where most 'general stuff' photography happens. Wide enough to get everything in without being sat on top of it. Of course your photography may vary.
I bought my 500D almost 3 years ago and wasn't too keen on the basic kit lens so I bought a 50mm f1.4. Although excellent quality, it was too long for general use, (friends & family etc.) I just hadn't realised how far back I would need to be to get a shot. A few days after buying the 50mm I bought a used 20-35mm as I wanted something wider.
I found the 35-50mm gap wasn't a problem. The problem was needing both, from one shot to the next, having to change lens every time I wanted to bridge the gap. I usually didn't bother and just cropped in post.
Having that range in one lens would have been so much better so, after doing some research, I bought the Tamron 17-50mm and the 20-35mm went in the drawer* next to my kit lens
Imo, a 50mm lens can be to long for 'general stuff' and the step up from 22mm is quite a big one, a 35mm would be something to look into though
Which version of the kit lens did you have? I wasn't impressed with mine (mk1 I think,) but I've heard better things about the later versions with IS, you can get one used for <£100, a fair bit cheaper than the Tamron.
(*It's back out again now, I've just bought a 6D so can't use the 17-50mm. But with the wider angle of view from a full frame sensor, the 50mm is more versatile so the gap won't be as much of an issue.)
I bought my 500D almost 3 years ago and wasn't too keen on the basic kit lens so I bought a 50mm f1.4. Although excellent quality, it was too long for general use, (friends & family etc.) I just hadn't realised how far back I would need to be to get a shot. A few days after buying the 50mm I bought a used 20-35mm as I wanted something wider.
I found the 35-50mm gap wasn't a problem. The problem was needing both, from one shot to the next, having to change lens every time I wanted to bridge the gap. I usually didn't bother and just cropped in post.
Having that range in one lens would have been so much better so, after doing some research, I bought the Tamron 17-50mm and the 20-35mm went in the drawer* next to my kit lens
Imo, a 50mm lens can be to long for 'general stuff' and the step up from 22mm is quite a big one, a 35mm would be something to look into though
Which version of the kit lens did you have? I wasn't impressed with mine (mk1 I think,) but I've heard better things about the later versions with IS, you can get one used for <£100, a fair bit cheaper than the Tamron.
(*It's back out again now, I've just bought a 6D so can't use the 17-50mm. But with the wider angle of view from a full frame sensor, the 50mm is more versatile so the gap won't be as much of an issue.)
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff