Welcome to a new Easy Exposure Photo Forum! I hope you will enjoy new features. It is still work in progress, so please be patients. Thanks!
July 25, 2012
Hello and welcome Silky.
I think it’s all a question of marketing. The kit lenses are not nano coated like the most of the prime and 2.8 zoom lenses. The kit lenses from 3.5 to 5.6 are cheaper, that’s why they come with the body, because for a smaller price they could fit the needs of newbie or amateur people newer to photography. Of course if you have experience and you want more from photography, maybe working on this area, or dedicate a lot of time and money, you should not buy a kit, but a body and a 2.8 or 1.4 lens. The kit is for people who want with a smaller price to be able to be ready to go and take pictures in a conventional, normal zoom range of 18 to 55 mm or more and don’t have particular needs of low light situations (for a 2.8) or a fast lens to do sport shots. Anyway, this is a question to be done to the manufacturers. Cheers.
August 11, 2011
I think the answer is simple. It is more expensive to make a zoom lens with fixed wide aperture like for example F2.8. If you compare a kit lens and high end zoom lens, kit lens is much smaller and lighter (obviously less materials was used to make it). Also better materials, better glass is used for more expensive lenses.
It doesn’t mean so that you can’t make a good photo with a kit lens. I know some people who won awards for pics taken by cellphone.
It just all depends what kind of photography you do and what would be photo used for.
Most Users Ever Online: 118
Currently Browsing this Page:
Brian Copeland: 449
Bjørn (Madman): 278
Guest Posters: 6
Newest Members:roza17, prashanthbionic, krishnasethu, rameshkrishna, jogeshocp, bbcapm, deepikamohan, pixelster, Michelbrain, lonelyphotographer
Administrators: easyexposure: 2151