MFW, I fell for the kit lenses are bad meme...

File: no difference from 50mm prime.jpg (245KB, 1500x997px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 1500x997px

Same IQ from 50mm prime.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D70
Camera Software	ViewNX 2.10 W
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	984
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	75 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:11:05 19:08:52
White Point Chromaticity	0.3
Exposure Time	1/400 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1500
Image Height	997
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	High
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

Also kit lenses have VR.

Primes don't have VR.

No excuse to not use the kit zoom lenses.

I love zoom now, zoom >>>> primes. Primes sucks! Avoid!

You won't look like a faggot walking forward and backwards a lot for every photo.

"Hey, take one phoot of me". -> walk forward.
"Hey, now take one photo of us." -> walk backwards.

>>2959788
Kit lenses in the pre-mirorrless age were complete shit. These days every manufacturer except Sony have taken note of this deficiency and supply new cameras with acceptably performing lenses. Thanks to easily baked software corrections, optical designs can give you more resolution and less CA, while letting software handle distortion and vignetting, even in your raw files. All while keeping the same cost as previous generations.

These lenses are starting to compete with much better lenses in the final print, if not in speed or build quality.

I'm not tossing my primes just yet, but in another 10 years I might not even need them if 1.8 zooms become more common.

>>2959788
>>2959789
Not sure how good the current kit lenses are. But I have a canon 18-55 kit lens from the original rebel, so it's like 10+ years old. it really isn't that good, except for my gf to take pictures of me taking pictures.

Then the sony kit lens I currently have, which was on the a6300 is good when it's wide, but absolutely horrid when zoomed in.

But honestly. Just shoot with that 50mm, no joke, you'll learn so much about composition and simplifying your image by using that. I used nothing but a 50mm for 2 years and it really helped my photography in general

>>2959788
>>2959789
how about you take the picture at the same aperture you fucking idiot

Learning how to use a fifty is also good for when you switch to some expensive system like Leica, Fuji, or Habblesad, and a standard lens is all you can afford for a couple of years afterward.

Also, dat bokeh

Kit lenses are for people who want to buy a pro-sumer camera to upgrade from their iPhones or point & shoots but do not want to spend on lenses.

90% of these photographers will be happy with the kit lens 90% of the time.

You either fall into this category, or you don't.

>>2959795
post your photography so we can see the improvement

File: DSC08829.jpg (2MB, 1620x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1620x1080px

>>2959850
Im not going to post my photos on /p/ again.

The last time I did, my image was reverse image searched, I was harassed about my photography, and people on here shit up my social media. Not doing that again, unless it's current stuff that I haven't posted on my social media yet.

Here's one that I've only posted on Instagram, nowhere else, so it won't show my name. Also, not taken with a 50mm, I stopped using that once I got tired of using it

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7R
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015.5 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	31 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:23 17:34:31
Exposure Time	75 sec
F-Number	f/3.2
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/3.2
Brightness	-6.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	31.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1620
Image Height	1080
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: 1137-2991.jpg (1MB, 1440x954px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1440x954px

18-55 vrII is titties

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi

Kit lenses from some companies are getting better. Zooms in general have been getting better over the years.

You either need a prime for sharpness/CA/Fast Aperture or you don't. It depends entirely on what you're shooting and your knowledge of the exposure triangle (triggered triangle guy pls go).

>>2959792
>Primes don't have VR.
Spotted the cuck who doesn't own the best lens that Canon sell. It's even a fifty-ish eqv on APS-C with IS!

Really though, more fast primes with IS would be a good thing, maybe Tamron will continue to be based enough to keep this trend up.

Modern kit lenses are pretty good, they have a reputation for being bad because of shit zoom lenses in the early digital days

It all lies on the targeted audience.

Some amateur who doesn't know what chromatic aberration is without google and will likely rely on AF 90% of the time won't notice quirks or softness in entry-level kit lens and bodies. "Ooh that looks nice" and keep going.

Yet a pro(or someone with a fat wallet or credit card) who's ready to unload on a D5 will likely notice such quirks under their scrutiny. Plus a normie unloading 5 or 6K might not have a lot of cash to unload on lens or just keep existing one, unlike the newfag who's expected to get better and upgrade over time.

Kit lens are designed to let the person who just bought the camera get used to it. Entry-level is entry-level and pro is often pro quality.

>>2959788
OP, it's up to you to decide whether to follow /p/ suggestions or not. It's up to you to think and generate your own opinion and see whether or not YOU think the lens are terrible and not hivefag. Meme's on you.
And learn about aperture. It's difficult to compare two shots when one is f1.8 and the other is at 5.3.

>>2960013
They may be okay as compared to old midrange or worse primes.

They're still no match for decent modern primes.

I personally hate that most zooms resolve to like 1/3 or less of your sensor's resolution and the rest is lost in blur.

File: IMG_8167.jpg (876KB, 4898x3265px)

876KB, 4898x3265px

I feel you OP. I'm just starting out so I'm trying to master my t3i kit lens. I took this one, and think it turned out pretty good.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS REBEL T3i
Camera Software	Picasa
Lens Size	18.00 - 55.00 mm
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.0.1
Lens Name	EF-S18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:11:05 18:16:37
Exposure Time	1/10 sec
F-Number	f/5.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/5.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	42.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4898
Image Height	3265
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	35cf5a1481f385b20000000000000000
Exposure Mode	Manual
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Evaluative
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Large
Focus Mode	One-Shot
Drive Mode	Continuous
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Fine
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	192
Color Matrix	135

I have both zoom and prime lenses in my bag they have their place.

The two zoom lenses I have are the stock 18-55 VR II and a Tokina 11-16 2.8 in the places those will be used in they are great for walkaround purpose.

I have a 35/2, 50 1.8 and 85 1.8 AF as well as a 180 2.8ED I use for low light. The 180 is the older AI-s version and on the d7000 it becomes a 300 2.8 and it's super sharp.

In the grand scheme of things it's all semantics some of the best digital photos that ever graced this board were done on 5mp compacts

I don't get the hate for kit lenses. I mainly use primes because I'm a videographer, but apart from speed and aperture control (which is obviously a huge factor) I don't see the harm in digging out the zoom. Some of my best-looking stuff has been shot on a kit lens because that's what I had on me at the time, and the lighting/framing/movement were infinitely more important.

>>2960204
We don't care about your personnal choice of gear. Fuck off, this isn't Facebook.

>some of the best digital photos that ever graced this board were done on 5mp compacts
Thank you for giving us a balance with your reposted snaps.

I wanted the Olympus 12-50 kit, but I like low light photography so I ordered a fast prime instead. Mainly cause money. I want the pro zoom, it opens to 2.8

>>2960353
Quit being a dickhead. He makes a valid point.

>>2959857
harassed for good reason

cool it with the saturation mate

File: Rockwell.jpg (79KB, 624x351px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 624x351px

>>2959857
Hi Ken!

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (13.020111012.m.258 2011/10/12:21:00:00) (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2012:08:04 12:12:50
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	624
Image Height	351

>>2959788
These guys
>>2959794
>>2959795
>>2959799
>>2960056
Are all right, if you keep up with photography and actually USE other lenses you will quickly realize how bad kit lenses are. Most are pretty passable for everyday shooting, but if you get used to quality photos and prints you will start to see distortion and CA out the ass on all of your shots. Thankfully PS and RAW can correct a lot of these issues, but point and click shooting can get very dirty, very quickly if you refuse to listen to reason.
I mean, shoot however you want, social media sizes and artifacting will hide 90% of those issues anyway. Just don't try showing anyone the full resolution, or printing in a size larger than 8x10

>>2960389
>He makes a valid point
LOL? Sugar, you seem to have dropped your trip to make yourself seem knowledgeable by replying in defense of your own shitpost. Please keep your trip on so everyone can recognize how wrong you are every time you post, this will improve /p/ as a whole.

>>2959857
Okay fucko.

Why f3.2? Why not f4?

File: received_1309665159063955.jpg (183KB, 2048x1365px)

183KB, 2048x1365px

I took this some time ago with kit lenses. I won't say it's good. Rather say it's kinda acceptable, but it's mine at least.

>>2960385
You made the right choice. I've got the 12-50 and whilst the weather sealing is great to have, as a lens it doesn't really do anything particularly well. The macro setting is ok, but too slow, the long end is practically unusable unless the light is spot on and the wide end has so much CA it makes my eyes hurt. Your 12-40 is a beast, well done anon...

>>2959788
thats what you get for listening to trolls dude

>>2959788
depends.
sony e mount 16-50mm is the junkiest kit lens ever.
canon ef-m 15-45mm f3.5-6.3 is just wtf tier. f6.3.
why bother?

>>2964572
dude, it's like a 24-70 but it's EF-M!

Canon can't release serious EF-M lenses again, it'd put their FF lenses at risk yo.

>>2959788
kit lenses are ok until you have to use them in low light desu
i've never done this but if you feel that way about zooms a better upgrade than a prime would be a constant aperture zoom