how much sharper is this VS the 18 55mm kit lens?
1163546
I have both lenses and while at first glance you may not notice the difference too much, if you spend some time comparing side by side and zooming in you'll notice the 50mm gives all round better results in crispness, colour and clarity.The 18-55mm is a decent lens for a kit lens and I still make use of it but I do side more with the 50mm when the situation calls for it, like street photography.
1163547
Fixed lens are ALWAYS sharper and the 1.8 is great in low light situation. Kit lens are not as sharp and usually slower (3.5 or 5.6) and therefore limit ur shooting possibilites. If u want a zoom spend the money for a fast one (2.8). I never buy kit lens. I bought d3200 body and 50mm 1.8vs and i have used it very often for newspaper gigs recently in a variety of lighting situations. The extra sharpness and speed payed off. My shots were crisp and clear when printed in the newspaper.
1163548
Uff... to much i will said... this are one of the finest cheapers lenses that you will find, the one thing that you must have in mind is that this is a f1.8 so that allows to get a lot more light meanwhile the 18-55 is a 3.5 and that my friend on the DLSR world is a big diference.
963789
55-210 like others has said should fit your needs. I wouldn't go with the 18-200 since you should already have the 18-55 with your kit. By the way, I use 18-55 for 90% of my shots. I bought the 55-210 myself, It's cheaper and in my test before I bought it, it has better contrast and IQ then the 18-200. The 18-55 and 55-210 are the only lens I take with me when I go on vacation. Also 18-200 is a lot heaver. FYI: Once you pass the beginning phase with this camera, get you some adaptors for other lens and it pretty much open a new world of options on photography. Have fun out there!
462700
I agree with this wholeheartedly. The difference could pay for the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS - A quick lens is very versatile.
89110
The 18-55mm lens is basic and comes with almost all bodies. It works great.
1703580
I'd vote neither. They have comparable image quality to the 18-55 IS... and they offer a greater focal range, but their image quality isn't stunning. I'd personally lean you towards a 24-105L used or a 15-85L used. They have comparable image quality to each other with the former having the benefit of a constant aperture through the focal range. Both are very very good lenses and will suffice for most of you needs. It should also be noted that most super zooms often have some form of distortion (which is common will all lenses), but the 18-xxx are often noted for mustache distortion as well as barrel or pin cushion... and that can be very distratcing. I'd vote neither. They have comparable image quality to the 18-55 IS... and they offer a greater focal range, but their image quality isn't stunning. I'd personally lean you towards a 24-105L used or a 15-85L used. They have comparable image quality to each other with the former having the benefit of a constant aperture through the focal range. Both are very very good lenses and will suffice for most of you needs. It should also be noted that most super zooms often have some form of distortion (which is common will all lenses), but the 18-xxx are often noted for mustache... » Read More I'd vote neither. They have comparable image quality to the 18-55 IS... and they offer a greater focal range, but their image quality isn't stunning. I'd personally lean you towards a 24-105L used or a 15-85L used. They have comparable image quality to each other with the former having the benefit of a constant aperture through the focal range. Both are very very good lenses and will suffice for most of you needs. It should also be noted that most super zooms often have some form of distortion (which is common will all lenses), but the 18-xxx are often noted for mustache distortion as well as barrel or pin cushion... and that can be very distratcing. « Show Less
767675
This lens and the Pentax 18-55 II are not really comparable. The 18-55 is a zoom, and the DA 50mm f1.8 is a prime, meaning, of course, no zoom. It's fixed at 50mm. Also, the 18-55 II will only open up to f3.5, so you really won't get the lovely narrow depth of field that you get with the 50mm f1.8, which is what makes this lens so attractive and seductive. So I guess it depends on what you want. The 18-55 would make a better walk-around utility lens. The 50mm f1.8 is a specialized, portrait lens that will give you a fantastically blurred background when shooting subjects up close. Personally, I think you should have both in your lens collection. This lens and the Pentax 18-55 II are not really comparable. The 18-55 is a zoom, and the DA 50mm f1.8 is a prime, meaning, of course, no zoom. It's fixed at 50mm. Also, the 18-55 II will only open up to f3.5, so you really won't get the lovely narrow depth of field that you get with the 50mm f1.8, which is what makes this lens so attractive and seductive. So I guess it depends on what you want. The 18-55 would make a better walk-around utility lens. The 50mm f1.8 is a specialized, portrait lens that will give you a fantastically blurred background when shooting subjects up close.... » Read More This lens and the Pentax 18-55 II are not really comparable. The 18-55 is a zoom, and the DA 50mm f1.8 is a prime, meaning, of course, no zoom. It's fixed at 50mm. Also, the 18-55 II will only open up to f3.5, so you really won't get the lovely narrow depth of field that you get with the 50mm f1.8, which is what makes this lens so attractive and seductive. So I guess it depends on what you want. The 18-55 would make a better walk-around utility lens. The 50mm f1.8 is a specialized, portrait lens that will give you a fantastically blurred background when shooting subjects up close. Personally, I think you should have both in your lens collection. « Show Less
1402482
Hi Chad, haven't tried it with a 18-55 but it works with all of my other Nikon lenses.
956489
I would go with the 18/135 lense . Have had both , 18 is newer , better technology , wider and lighter . Pictures are outstanding
364836
The difference is in the scope of the shots you take. The 18-55 will take a wider to somewhat narrow view while the extra distance the 135 gives you allow not only the distance but an even narrower yet view. The lens of the 135 is longer and a little heavier . In summation , if you budget shopping and have no need to take many long distance shots buy the 55. If your not as much on a budget and need the distance shots or narrower shots buy the 135
2066264
with the 18-55 definitely, however right out the box you may need to move a few rails around to get it to fit your shooting style or larger lenses, but it will definitely fit, this is a great, strong rig.
1250348
It is, better than the kit lens for sure. I also bought 35mm prime lens so I use that for portraits now.
1820410
This lens is entirely different from the kit lens. And we don't know what kit lens you are talking about. Of the 40D? of the XT? I got the XT and the 40D. Both came with a 17?-55mm and a 28-135mm IS. The 50mm lens is a different lens all together because it doesn't zoom so you'll be doing a lot of moving back and forward with your feet. The nice thing about this lens is that pictures are RAZOR SHARP. I mean I've never seen pictures sharper than what this lens has produced. I bought 2 of these lenses because I really love the pictures they take. Also, this lens can take pictures in a dark room about 10 times as easy as the kit lens on the 40D or the XT. The f/1.8 is amazing. The color, the light, the picture sharpness = worth $70 by far. GET IT. :)
876532
The 18-55mm is the standard kit lens wide zoom with only zooms to 55mm. The 55-200mm lens zooms to a wonderful 200mm but is also a kit lens.
1974651
I've had the 50mm 1.8 and the kit lens, and I can definitely say this will blow both of them away! This is essentially a high-quality upgrade from the kit lens, and in my opinion gives at least as good an image result as the 50mm prime - but with the range of a zoom. The 35mm I don't have experience with, but I would still bet that the Sigma would compete just fine :)
1886676
I find that the 18-135 lens is extremely sharp. It shows every hair, for example, on a dog. You may or may not think this is good enough.If you are in a static environment the 100 mm is excellent, but for outdoor use with a lot of movement, I prefer the 1-135 and I own both. I find I use the 18-135 the most as it has greater flexibility for framing your subject.
2014123
If you can afford it I'd recommend the 17-55mm IS 2.8. This a basically an L quality lens but doesn't carry the L in it's name because it is a EF-S series lens. It is very fast and the sharpness and overall IQ are comparable to the 24-105L IS. The range on the 17-85mm IS is really great and it is about $400 less but the images are softer and the varible aperature starting at 4 will not be nearly as fast. the 17-55mm IS 2.8 is a GREAT walkaround lens and will rarely leave your camera.
1927592
I have the 18-135 and I love it. I've not used the 18-55 so I'm not sure about the quality being the same.