Kit lens not up to much

For me (and this is not aimed at anyone) the number of photographers that have more ability than their gear can deliver is so small as to be insignificant.

I know the gear I have has plenty of head room for me- I shall try and improve technique and processing to get a better results.

Give the kit lens to a great tog and they will get stunning results IMHO.

The 16-45 image you have posted is sharper than the 18-55 one (marginally), but is not as sharp as I would expect. I recently sold my 16-45 when I bought a DA17-70 and my copy was definitely a lot sharper than my 18-55, particularly at the edges of the frame. My 18-55 didn't really get a look in once I had a 16-45, although I still have a good opinion of the 18-55, considering its 'only' a kit lens.

Regards
David

I'm not really sure of the point of the above as equally a great photographer will get stunning results on a mobile phone cam.

Should we avoid criticising all equipment on the basis that 'it always exceeds our abilities'? Should we stick to owning the cheapest and basic of equipment under the same basis?




Well as said, I just thought it was boring.

Why was the output boring?

It lacked any excitement for me.

Excitement can be very subjective.

For example, Flickr reckons that this is my least interesting image taken with the 18-55 WR (it won't be in a minute, after you lot have pixel-peeped it). From what I remember, the scene was quite exciting, just that I probably had the wrong lens on at the time



Water by kh1234567890, on Flickr

Excitement can be very subjective. [/quote]It's totally subjective.

How can Flickr determine how interesting something is? It's just a website.

Did you?



.

My copy of the MkII is very good and the Mk 1 I had gave
exactly the same performance. The colour is also excellent.

Like all kit lenses, it's neither terribly wide, terribly long nor terribly fast. It's worth having in the bag though as a reasonably well-made and weather resistant lens for those occasions when you don't need specialist capabilities. The only kit lens I've used which is significantly better in both build and image quality is the original Panasonic 14-45.

That said, I prefer to use faster lenses where possible. The viewfinder is brighter, the compromises in lower light or with moving subjects are less, and you have more options to play with selective focus. I guess the last two of those can both impact on the look of the final image, but I think the actual image quality from the DA18-55's I've used (still have a copy of the mark ii) is pretty decent for what it is, and at anything like a normal viewing size and distance.