Best general overall lense for Canon Xti?

I am currently deciding between purchasing the Canon Xti with the default lense or just buying the body and getting a separate lense.
I am going to be using the lense for basically everything (some macro, some zoom, general photos of everyday things, special events, etc.) and currently I am just looking for one general lense that is sufficient for all that.

If I were to get a separate lense, which would be the best one to get in terms of price and image quality? Thanks.

If you are looking for one single lens that will do macro, zoom, general photos, special events etc. on a SLR, then you'd better get a P&S and save a bundle.

One of many things that makes a SLR different than P&S is the ability to change lenses. But if you'll never change the lens, why bother with SLR?

I will be changing lenses, but just not in the beginning when I am still experimenting with the camera.
Previously I was just going to stick with the default EF-S 18-55 lens for this purpose, but if I were to get just the body I would want some lens to act as a replacement for the EF-S 18-55 Lens.
Again right now I might as well go ahead with the Xti with the default EF-S 18-55 lens after I find the best price I can get it for.

Simply use the kit lens first, then learn its limitations. Based on your experiences, once you have figured out what you desire in a lens (e.g. more reach faster aperture, etc.), you can then upgrade appropriately. I wouldn't suggest buying nicer lenses until you have a better understanding of the equipment and what your needs are.

Originally Posted by NiMSo

Simply use the kit lens first, then learn its limitations. Based on your experiences, once you have figured out what you desire in a lens (e.g. more reach faster aperture, etc.), you can then upgrade appropriately. I wouldn't suggest buying nicer lenses until you have a better understanding of the equipment and what your needs are.

I agree. The kit lens is more capable than what most people thinks. Once you have mastered the kit lens, your next upgrade is going to be very enjoyable. If you must get another lens, get a Canon 50mm F1.8 to go with your kit lens, since the kit lens doesn't work too well in the low light, and the 50mm should take care of that for you - at a very good price vs performance perspective too.

I agree that you should get the kit lens first. Buying lenses before figuring out your real style gets expensive real quick. The first lens that comes to mind to be a decent replacement with good focal length would be the 17-85 IS but it's not cheap.

I don't recommend you go with the 50mm f/1.8 or another lens until you find that the 18-55 is too limiting. 50mm is an unusual focal length to have on your camera on a full time basis for some. Download Exposureplot and it will show you how often you use 50mm among your pictures. Granted, the kit lens only goes to 55mm so you may be at the max more often than not but it is a handy tool to have at your disposal.

I'm not against the 50mm, I just don't think that it should be a blind recommendation based on price. It's no good to you if you don't find it a handy focal length. I find it too close for indoor work in smaller rooms which tends to be where you might find the kit lens limiting due to it being "slow".

Something like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 or Canon 28mm f/1.8 might be more your style. Or the 50mm focal length might work and you could look into the Sigma f/2.8 macro lens, which is "ok" for indoor work and macro work at the same time.

For my experience when I first bought a DSLR, it was a Nikon D70 with a kit lens. I loved it until I found out the kit lens wasn't my need. So I went out and got few lens that I wanted.

For example, I like taking close-up photos, I got a macro lens for it. Or: I like landscape, I went for a wide angle lens.... etc.

Man, lens is hardest choice you will come by. Good luck with your choices.

Originally Posted by goofball

I agree that you should get the kit lens first. Buying lenses before figuring out your real style gets expensive real quick. The first lens that comes to mind to be a decent replacement with good focal length would be the 17-85 IS but it's not cheap.

I don't recommend you go with the 50mm f/1.8 or another lens until you find that the 18-55 is too limiting. 50mm is an unusual focal length to have on your camera on a full time basis for some. Download Exposureplot and it will show you how often you use 50mm among your pictures. Granted, the kit lens only goes to 55mm so you may be at the max more often than not but it is a handy tool to have at your disposal.

I'm not against the 50mm, I just don't think that it should be a blind recommendation based on price. It's no good to you if you don't find it a handy focal length. I find it too close for indoor work in smaller rooms which tends to be where you might find the kit lens limiting due to it being "slow".

Something like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 or Canon 28mm f/1.8 might be more your style. Or the 50mm focal length might work and you could look into the Sigma f/2.8 macro lens, which is "ok" for indoor work and macro work at the same time.

The 50mm is not in a replacement for the kit lens. It is definitely a good prime for beginners (or even some pro have it in their bag) if they want to try out the primes without spending $400+ just to see whether they like to use prime.

The prime makes a VERY good portrait lens for beginners as well:

Indoor, bad lighting, ISO 1600, 1/125, F1.8, XTi

Prime is another aspect of photography, and regardless, for the price of $100 or under, it's being well regarded as one of the best lens for the value. It's almost a must have, unless you do have loads of money to spend on a prime just to try it out, then you can skip this and go for other ones.

Originally Posted by goofball

I agree that you should get the kit lens first. Buying lenses before figuring out your real style gets expensive real quick. The first lens that comes to mind to be a decent replacement with good focal length would be the 17-85 IS but it's not cheap.

I don't recommend you go with the 50mm f/1.8 or another lens until you find that the 18-55 is too limiting. 50mm is an unusual focal length to have on your camera on a full time basis for some. Download Exposureplot and it will show you how often you use 50mm among your pictures. Granted, the kit lens only goes to 55mm so you may be at the max more often than not but it is a handy tool to have at your disposal.

I'm not against the 50mm, I just don't think that it should be a blind recommendation based on price. It's no good to you if you don't find it a handy focal length. I find it too close for indoor work in smaller rooms which tends to be where you might find the kit lens limiting due to it being "slow".

Something like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 or Canon 28mm f/1.8 might be more your style. Or the 50mm focal length might work and you could look into the Sigma f/2.8 macro lens, which is "ok" for indoor work and macro work at the same time.

The 50mm is not in a replacement for the kit lens. It is definitely a good prime for beginners (or even some pro uses it) if they want to try out the primes without spending $400+ just to see whether they like to use prime.

The prime makes a VERY good portrait lens for beginners as well:

Indoor, bad lighting, ISO 1600, 1/125, F1.8, XTi

Prime is another aspect of photography, and regardless, for the price of $100 or under, it's being well regarded as one of the best lens for the value. It's almost a must have, unless you do have loads of money to spend on a prime just to try it out, then you can skip this and go for other ones.

Having that said, with your "recommendation" of replacing the kit lens with the 17-85, I don't see how "good" it is. The 17-85 suffers horrible distortion at the wide end, slow, and the IS will give you a stop quicker but not to help you freeze action. Don't you need to find out what he shoot before you suggest him that?

Originally Posted by cy

The 50mm is not in a replacement for the kit lens. It is definitely a good prime for beginners (or even some pro have it in their bag) if they want to try out the primes without spending $400+ just to see whether they like to use prime.

The prime makes a VERY good portrait lens for beginners as well:
Indoor, bad lighting, ISO 1600, 1/125, F1.8, XTi

Prime is another aspect of photography, and regardless, for the price of $100 or under, it's being well regarded as one of the best lens for the value. It's almost a must have, unless you do have loads of money to spend on a prime just to try it out, then you can skip this and go for other ones.

I never said it was a replacement for the kit lens. I never even said that it wasn't a good lens. I just said that the focal length may not suit and at that point, what good reason is there to have a lens that won't get used, regardless of whether it only cost $100?

Most macro lenses are prime lenses as well. They could just go that route instead and have a lens that does double duty.

All I'm saying is that to blindly recommend a lens just because it is cheap isn't very good. I can count on one hand the number of times my 50mm has been on the camera in a year. Hardly a good way to spend $120 (Nikon is more expensive), wouldn't you say?

Originally Posted by goofball

I never said it was a replacement for the kit lens. I never even said that it wasn't a good lens. I just said that the focal length may not suit and at that point, what good reason is there to have a lens that won't get used, regardless of whether it only cost $100?

Most macro lenses are prime lenses as well. They could just go that route instead and have a lens that does double duty.

All I'm saying is that to blindly recommend a lens just because it is cheap isn't very good. I can count on one hand the number of times my 50mm has been on the camera in a year. Hardly a good way to spend $120 (Nikon is more expensive), wouldn't you say?

Sorry, to me, if i use the lens a few times and gave me good pictures, that's already worth it. Especially for $100. If you find $100 is too much, maybe you are not in the market of DSLR I am very positive that the OP will have some family members or friends that he wants to take pictures of, and I can bet you ANYTHING that the 50mm will give him a better result than the kit lens. On top, that is definitely one of the most suggested lens around and ultimately it's up to the OP to try it out in store and see whether he likes it.

Having that said, 50mm is one of the most popular focal length, and if one were to try prime, the 50mm f1.8 would most likely to be the case without breaking the bank. 50mm is the focal length of a human's eye sight, that's why it's also easy to work with. I have recommended this to countless of people and they've all been happy.

On the other hand, the 17-85 recommendation you have made is way off since you want the OP to spend $450-500 on a lens without knowing what he shoot?

What lenses you use? I would laugh if you tell me a kit lens.

Originally Posted by cy

Sorry, to me, if i use the lens a few times and gave me good pictures, that's already worth it. Especially for $100. If you find $100 is too much, maybe you are not in the market of DSLR I am very positive that the OP will have some family members or friends that he wants to take pictures of, and I can bet you ANYTHING that the 50mm will give him a better result than the kit lens. On top, that is definitely one of the most suggested lens around and ultimately it's up to the OP to try it out in store and see whether he likes it.

Having that said, 50mm is one of the most popular focal length, and if one were to try prime, the 50mm f1.8 would most likely to be the case without breaking the bank. 50mm is the focal length of a human's eye sight, that's why it's also easy to work with. I have recommended this to countless of people and they've all been happy.

On the other hand, the 17-85 recommendation you have made is way off since you want the OP to spend $450-500 on a lens without knowing what he shoot?

What lenses you use? I would laugh if you tell me a kit lens.

Why would it matter if I did use a kit lens? The photographer is still the most important aspect of photography. I can take beautiful pictures with a POS camera.

50mm is very popular, I'm not debating that. We're not here to talk about what is popular though, are we? What works for you and me and other's isn't what might work for this other person. 50mm on a full frame is normal. 50mm on an APS-C sensor is not normal FOV.

17-85 gives a beginner a longer focal length along and IS. I've easily recommended Nikon 18-200VR as first lens for most first time Nikon DSLR users, is that also a mistake? Not everyone wants to have to change lenses. On an XTi, this equates to 27-136mm in 35mm terms, a very popular focal length for most coming from standard P&S camera's (5x zoom). They said what they shot in their original post.

Originally Posted by goofball

Why would it matter if I did use a kit lens? The photographer is still the most important aspect of photography. I can take beautiful pictures with a POS camera.

50mm is very popular, I'm not debating that. We're not here to talk about what is popular though, are we? What works for you and me and other's isn't what might work for this other person. 50mm on a full frame is normal. 50mm on an APS-C sensor is not normal FOV.

17-85 gives a beginner a longer focal length along and IS. I've easily recommended Nikon 18-200VR as first lens for most first time Nikon DSLR users, is that also a mistake? Not everyone wants to have to change lenses. On an XTi, this equates to 27-136mm in 35mm terms, a very popular focal length for most coming from standard P&S camera's (5x zoom). They said what they shot in their original post.

If you dont' want to change lens, go back to P&S. Thanks.

Bottom line is, i am making an suggestion, you are too. Don't get at me for making a suggestion that is not the same as what you have in mind. I have plenty of reaosns to support mine, and so do you. That's what I am trying to tell you.

Now i will leave this thread alone. Enjoy your kit lens goofball.

Originally Posted by cy

If you dont' want to change lens, go back to P&S. Thanks.

I never said I didn't want to. If you read the OP's post, they are saying they wanted a general purpose lens. They also said what they would like to do with it too. Clearly they state that they would like some zoom. Yes, you can foot zoom with a prime but there's not always room to foot zoom.

Originally Posted by cy

Bottom line is, i am making an suggestion, you are too. Don't get at me for making a suggestion that is not the same as what you have in mind. I have plenty of reaosns to support mine, and so do you. That's what I am trying to tell you.

I never said that they should never consider 50mm lens. I just said they need to see if the focal length suited them. I said this before you posted and I'm still saying it now. Remember, you came at me first

Originally Posted by cy

Now i will leave this thread alone. Enjoy your kit lens goofball.

I never admitted or denied I have a kit lens (I still don't see the relevance to the kit lens point...) but it seems like you don't really read the posts thoroughly anyways.

Now let's all just get along.

Originally Posted by cy

What lenses you use? I would laugh if you tell me a kit lens.

Originally Posted by cy

Now i will leave this thread alone. Enjoy your kit lens goofball.

You've now established yourself as a gear-wh0re who cares more about the hardware in the configuration rather than the images it can produce. You're branding all kit lenses as being bad and absolute garbage, when that is simply not true.

Canon's kit 18-55mm is indeed built quite poorly, but stopped down a few stops certainly helps sharpness. Same goes for Nikon's 18-55mm kit. Your logic would also dictate that Nikon's 18-70mm f3.5-4.5 "kit" lens is trash as well. Far from it - this walkaround is well-built and very sharp for the money. Pentax's 18-55mm kit has a de-coupled AF motor so you can manually override focus at any time. Not bad at all for a kit lens.

If the OP gets a 50mm f1.8 prime lens that you suggest, but has no idea how to use it, "how do I zoom out?", then it is $100 wasted for the sake of having a cool lens and adding to the elitist gear-wh0re factor.

No L, no care, right?