Using kit lense of Canon 450d/500d--are they worth it?

You'll hear a lot of conflicting information regarding the kit lens. For me, as an amateur photographer, the kit lens is perfectly adequate and a fairly versatile first lens. I used the kit lens only for BJD photography with my 450D for about a year I think, and it was fine. While it's not the greatest lens in the world it is one of the cheaper ones, and my skill level is such that I don't run up against its limitations all that much (other than wishing it could do a bigger aperture, which leads into my next point...).

My favorite lens for BJD photography is the Canon EF 50mm/f1.8 prime lens. It's about the most bang for your lens buck as you're going to get with Canon (it was about $90 when I bought it a few years ago; it's up to like $110 now, but that's still incredibly cheap for a half-decent lens). I use it for basically all my BJD photography now. While a macro lens would probably be better, Canon macro lenses start around $300 and go up from there, and that's a bit out of my price range for a lens I wanted specifically for BJD photos and pictures of flowers.

I do not, however, use the 50mm/f1.8 lens as a "walk around" lens much. Since it's a prime lens it doesn't zoom; you have to zoom with your feet. If I'm taking vacation photos or photos of scenery or going to the zoo, I generally pack my kit lens instead, since it's a bit more versatile and I can't always zoom with my feet unless I want to hop a fence or wade into a lake.

So personally I think if you want a DSLR, especially for taking photos of things other than dolls, the kit lens is a worthwhile investment. It's a lens you'll "outgrow" if you get really seriously into photography, probably, but as a hobbyist with a limited budget I haven't found it problematic. It's perfectly adequate for BJD photography, and I'd recommend using it as your first lens and seeing if/how its limitations bother you and then moving on with lens purchases from there. Especially if you're an SLR photography beginner, the "problems" with the lens aren't something you'll notice too much for a while.

 

The kit lens is fine. It is small, cheap and punches above its weight in image quality.

For best results, use it on a tripod or in bright light. In dimmer lighting, it will work acceptably on targets that don't move (like dolls). Consider buying the ~$100 50mm f/1.8 lens mentioned above to address the kit lens's weakness.

 

The 18-55 IS kit lens is actually considered quite respectable optically. Sure you can get better but you have to pay a lot more! Do note that applies to the IS version with stabilisation. The non-IS version has a different optical design which is not so good putting aside the matter of IS. So unless you are planning to spend lots, get the kit lens for general purpose use. You're not going to get better at the bundle price.

A macro lens isn't a direct requirement for regular doll photography. Only if you want to do a stuper close up puki portrait might you consider one specifically. The 18-55 IS lens has a maximum magnification of around 1/3x. For a sense of scale, if you were photographing a flat surface, the long edge of the image is around 67mm or 2.6 inches. A dedicated macro lens would image 22 and a bit mm or a bit under an inch on the long edge.

 

Sad to say that aside from the kit lens, there is no lens that will do what you ask: (1) zoom, (2) "can capture fine detail", (3) under $111. The two cheapest lenses around are the kit lens and 50 f/1.8. Anything else costs more, period.

Aside from the kit lens, two lenses come to mind, but they are about $200 each. Though most likely less if you are good at buying.

• To recap: the 18-55 IS kit lens can zoom and will do about 33% life-size. It costs about $100 used or when bought with a camera. You'll be about 9 inches away at maximum magnification.
• The Canon 55-250 IS can zoom and will do about 30% life-size. In close up use, its main advantage over the 18-55 IS is working distance: at maximum magnification you'll be 3 feet away.
• The Canon 50mm f/2.5 macro will do 50% life-size. It is the sharpest of the three, but naturally does not zoom. It lets in the most light of the three (it is "faster") which compensates for the lack of IS. You'll be about 8 inches away at maximum magnification.

There are a few other lenses (Canon and not) available for about $100-200. Most are fairly old designs, dating from the film era, and all will lack IS. I do not mention them because I believe they are poorer choices than the lenses above.

 

Mello~ thank you for asking this question. I also have a Canon 450D and wondering the same.

gaiaswill~thank you for the above response. It was very very informative!!!!

 

I can second the recommendation for the 18 to 55 kit lens. The image stabilizer is great and comes in handy when shooting SDs. They are going for about $70 right now used. Just remember that indoors you should use a tripod for the camera and good lighting for best results with this lens. I have used just a tripod and a remote shutter release to take some very good non flash photos, but any vibrations in the room will ruin them. When doing this I normally setup late at night or when no one is home.

Bobby