[lassa8]

I'm looking into getting the Canon 300D sometime in the next few months, and I was just wondering if anyone got it with the kit lens and what they thought about it. I'd like to get a lens somewhere around that range (18-55mm is the kit lens, if my memory serves me correctly), though maybe slightly longer, to start out (can't afford anything too expensive at the moment). Can anyone suggest a decent lens around 28-80mm that won't cost me an arm and a leg?

[christineredgate]

Lassa,the kit lens is a waste of space.I was on the point of returning the camera to the dealer the next day,as the pics were of no comparison to my Fuji 602 I had traded in as part exchange.We did purchase the Canon 28-200mm lens a week later .It is a small zoom lens and a good all rounder.It takes reasonable landscape pics,and anything close by.But not very good for bird images.But all images taken with this lens have turned out well.Do not know the price,but you can easily find that out.There may be other good lenses such as ones in the Sigma range which are compatible with Canon cameras.But do not waste money on the kit lens,unless you really have no other option.Buy a second hand lens.The dealer is bound to have some.
Hopefully someone else may put a response to this thread ,Lassa ,who will have more knowledge than myself.
Having said that ,Lassa,I was not very good with this camera at first,so others may have had more positive results.

[martinrobinson]

I agree with Christine. You'd be better off buying the 300D body and getting hold of a different lens. I have a Canon 17-40 L ( I can hear Christine groaning ). It is much better than the 18-50, but costs a lot more.

Another consideration is the fact that the 18-55s that you can buy in the kit, will only fit the 300D. So if you decide to upgrade in the futuren ( 10D or 1D etc ), you won't be able to use the lens. I'm sure someone else will be able to suggest a good £100 lens.

[christineredgate]

Martin I hope you are having more success with the 17-40 L than I am!!.I find the 28-200mm takes better landscape images.It eally is an excellent little lens,very versatile.

[christineredgate]

Originally Posted by christineredgate

Martin I hope you are having more success with the 17-40 L than I am!!.I find the 28-200mm takes better landscape images.It really is an excellent little lens,very versatile.

Why does Yahoo keep asking me to lengthen my message to more than 5 characters!! each time I press the submit reply button.I think I should have pressed edit.

[CJW]

Well, if I can lay my 'neutral Moderator's head' to one side for a moment, I've never heard such rubbish talked on one thread and it's only 6 posts long!
That 18-55mm 'kit lens' is perfectly good at the job for which it was designed. I got my 300D with the same lens.

[christineredgate]

Well CJ I had better take it out from itsbox and have another try.But I notice you did not use for your beautiful Dunlin pics,Chris!!!

[dj1947]

Originally Posted by lassa8

I'm looking into getting the Canon 300D sometime in the next few months, and I was just wondering if anyone got it with the kit lens and what they thought about it. I'd like to get a lens somewhere around that range (18-55mm is the kit lens, if my memory serves me correctly), though maybe slightly longer, to start out (can't afford anything too expensive at the moment). Can anyone suggest a decent lens around 28-80mm that won't cost me an arm and a leg?

hi not shore if u have any dealers but in the uk dixons do a great deal u get a canon 3000n 28- 80 zoom and a 75-300 zoom for just over 300pounds dj
great deal