[ReinF1]

Hello there!

I've finally decided to purchase a Canon 400d this October. But I'm wondering if I should purchase the kit lens or just the body. I've read alot of mixed reviews with regards to the 18-55 lens kit that Canon is offering. What would be a better lens for me who is still a beginner? I would like a lens that offers, wide angle and a bit of telephoto capability.

Regards,

Rein

[Markulous]

The 18-55mm kit lens is cheap and cheerful - I'd say that if you can get body and lens as a package and a good deal, then go for it! There are plenty of sharper lenses (and those that would say the Sigma 18-55mm is better value, if bought seperately) but it's a good all round starter lens!

Enjoy the 400D - look forward to seeing the pics!

[fionaB]

as someone who has the 400D and the kit lens i can echo what Mark says, the kit lens is NOT the best lens, BUT its a lot better than folk give it credit for being. its not a fast lens by any means but its not a bad lens and if you are a beginner it will give u plenty scope for experimentation. it depends on the money and how much u are willing to spend.

Fi

[ChrisRabior]

No matter what anyone says, the 18-55mm kit is the cheapest 'wide angle' lens you can find. Yeah, it's not the best in terms of quality compared to an L series, but it's still a good lens if you use it in the conditions it was designed for.

In the grand scheme of things, you could probably get away with a number of lenses that fit your description..
canon's 17-85 IS, 28-105, 28-135 IS, 28-85
tamron and sigma also have a range of lenses that fit the bill.. 18-200, 28-300, 17-70, etc.

My advice to you is to buy your lenses to match what you're shooting. Take me for example. The sigma 28-70mm f/2.8-4.0 lens and the canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6 (nonIS) that I bought were literally a waste of money. The sigma doesn't hold a candle to the 28-75mm f/2.8 it was replaced by, and the canon isn't nearly as fast as the 70-200mm f/4 I'm planning on moving up to. If it was me, I would probably go for something like the 17-85mm canon lens.

What it all comes down to is that you're the only one who really knows what it is you want. 17 isn't wide enough for me, which is why I want a better wide angle. 28 may be fine for you. the 85 would work enough for me most of the time, but you may want to go up to 135. The best thing for you to do is to go to a local camera store and test out the lenses you think you may want to get with your XTi.

If you're not entirely sure on what you want, you can't go wrong with the plastic fantastic, aka nifty fifty, aka Canon 50mm f/1.8 prime lens.

[Dave Canon]

All depends where you are starting from. If you already have a selection of compatible lenses then do you need the kit lens? If this is a first DSLR then, although the kit lens is limited in quality, could you buy a better lens with your budget?

When I bought my DSLR, I already had some compatible lenses but my previous wide angle zoom was not compatible so bought the body and a wide angle zoom.

[Boofers]

Have had my 400D for a week now, real nice camera, easy to use. I learned the knobs on a 20D and it would seem like a step down,,surprise surprise. Although a little smaller it is quite the capable camera. My first lens was a 100-400 IS for the 20D, like Dave Canon say's you buy what your going to use. We have the 18-55 and it's a nice lens, but I would get a nifty fifty (50mm) over it. Have fun with the camera Rein,,

[ReinF1]

Thanks for the help guys! :-D

[mr cat]

I wouldn't buy the kit lense - it's quite poor...buy the body and just get the nifty fifty...look on fleabay - there are bargains to be had

[ReinF1]

I'm very happy to report that I now own a Canon 400D. Thanks for all the suggestions. I bought it with the kit lens yesterday. Then some extra batteries, tripod, CF cards, and a camera bag. I've been taking pictures inside the house and so far so good. I really like the macro feature. But i've noticed that it's hard getting the right pictures using low iso without using a flash. It's all blurry...maybe because my arms and hands shake alot? Or inexperience? Any suggestions?

Also my wife and I would be spending a 3 day vacation in a very nice, white beach, south of our country and would like some suggestions on keeping my camera protected from the elements...

Warm Regards

[mr cat]

suggestions..? - yeah, look at my post - Canon 400D second lens

*doh*

[Whipspeed]

If you want to take low ISO photo's indoors, you will need a tripod for the longer exposures, it's just not possible to handhold the camera for them (even with experience) and instead of pressing the shutter, use the self timer, or if you can get one a cable release and you won't shake the camera and tripod as you take the shot.
As for keeping the camera protected on the beach, keep it in a bag when you are not using it and use a blower after being on the beach, just to blow any sand away. If you have a second lens, be very careful if you need to change lenses on the beach, as you are likely to get sand in the body. If you should get anything on the sensor, there are some tutorials on here for cleaning.
The kit lens although cheap and cheerful it can be a good lens, for a while when I had my 1st DSLR it was the only lens I had and it produced some pin sharp shots.
Hope that helps.

[Markulous]

Hmm, don't think your post is very useful, mr cat!

If you're suffering camera shake through low shutter speeds, Rein, you'll need to up the ISO, use flash, a tripod or get a faster lens (as mr cat, somewhat unhelpfully, suggests).

I use a plastic bag with a hole for the lens, to protect against sand/dust. Not very elegant but it is effective (I've also a Rain Hood - for when conditions get very bad!)

[GainfulShrimp]

I would expect to shoot at ISO400 or more likely 800 indoors. In dim lighting - i.e. evenings etc, maybe even 1600 or 3200 to get shake free pics.

IS lenses will help, as will faster lenses...