[jeverettfine]

I have been photographing for over 40 years now and know my needs pretty well by now, though every now and then I surprise myself. I have used 35mm, 2 1/4, 6x7, 4x5, and even 8x10 cameras. Among the 35mm, I have used various SLR brands as well as Leica rangefinder. I am not a big telephoto user. My recommendation for use on your Kx (keeping in mind the smaller sensor etc) would be to get a couple of fast primes. If you want lenses fully compatible with your Kx then look for FA lenses in addition to the current DA line up. Look for f2 or 2.8 lenses (28mm, 35mm) and get a fast 50 f/1.7 or f/1.4. Then you will want to add something longer from the 77 to a 100 or 135. Personally I find zooms be less than ideal, especially when learning. Since you can stand in one spot and frame with the zoom only, they can keep you from moving your body to find the best framing.
As far as the current lenses are concerned, the DA limited line is hard to beat.

[fLyIr]

Have to say, that my copy of new Tamron 28-75 was absolutely unusable because of huge FF @ 75mm and BF @ 28, so i couldn't adjust AF in debug mode on my K-x... It was my first experience with zooms, so i decided to stick with primes only. Also, primes always the best choice regarding low light shooting, best IQ and size... Now i'm trying to build my primes collection which i think will contain DA 15 f4 limited, Sigma 20 f1.8, FA f50 1.4, DA limited 70 f2.4, maybe something of a 200mm. The only zoom i am considering is FishEye DA 10-17.

[abacus07]

If I could only have one prime it would be the FA43. Put it in a set with the DA15 and a compact 100mm macro (M100/4) and you have my ideal 3 lens travel set.

But I love buying lenses and like to have everything covered. Imo the first lens that a newb on a budget should buy is a fast fifty (M50/1.7 or 1.4). Or look for a used F50/1.7 (several have been for sale around $200 in the marketplace). 50mm's will be a difficult focal length at first (at least for me it was) but it forces you to compose your image tighter and get rid of boring stuff. Until I got my DA40 I paired my A50/1.7 with a 24/28 and could take pretty much every photo I wanted (except some waterfalls and concerts). But of course more lenses give you different creative options.

[timo]

I have always been fasinated by photography but i am just now starting to jump into it. I have a K-r and am slowly seeing how crappy the kit lenses are. My question is what is the #1 lens i should have invested in first and why?

I know there is no perfect answer so i am really looking for personal opinions here.

-Chad

Just got back from my Christmas travels to see this well-established thread - as someone said, the OP must be thoroughly confused. The question is in fact impossible to answer, as needs vary so much. Just a few comments: as others have said the 18-55 is not at all crappy within its limitations (I have three and the original version performs best). My DA 50-200 (original version) is not great wide open at long FLs, but perfectly OK as a travel lens in good light stopped down to f8. The 55-300 is arguably better but mine has slight decentering issues at various lengths and is too big and heavy for my taste. I find I hardly use it.

But the first lens I bought secondhand when I first got my *istD is still the one that I would take on a trip if I could only take one - the FA24-90, with an almost ideal walkabout range, and pretty good at all settings. Yes yes there are times when you want longer or wider, or faster in low light, but these are specific needs for specific situations. The 24-90 covers a great range of situations without lens changing, with very little IQ compromise as far as I can see. It's not all that big or heavy either.

Tim

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

This has been a one-way conversation since 12/21/2011, but people don't seem to notice they are just talking to themselves.

[RioRico]

This has been a one-way conversation since 12/21/2011, but people don't seem to notice they are just talking to themselves.

We never let the absence of an OP slow us down.

[frank]

Dont get me wrong, i have made good use of the 18-55 lens that came with my camera. I guess i shouldnt have said the kit lens was crappy. What i was really getting at is that i am investing in better lenses now because i think i am getting the hang of the camera and i want better quality lenses. I currently have the 18-55 DAL kit lens, and the FA 50mm f1.4 lens. I love the 50mm!! This week i bought the DA 18-135mm and just yesterday i bought the DA 16-45mm but i'm still waiting for them to arrive so i havent had a chance to play with them yet. I take a lot of photos for my business which is what got me wanting to upgrade my camera in the first place. My inital thinking was to replace the kit lens with the 16-45mm for my business and have the 18-135mm for when i go out walking around. I bought the 50mm exclusively for photographing my car which is my other hobby.

My original post was suggesting if you were just starting out in DSLRs and you could only have one lens in the bag, what would it be and why? What lens would give the best overall happy medium for everyday photography? The kit lens is getting much respect. Mine is the bottom level DAL and i am just not happy with the overall lens(quailty and construction). I guess i will hold onto it for now because it does take decent pics for what it is and it is pretty lightweight.

Here are some pics i've done with the kit lens.

You've got more than what a newbie needs I think. Just keep using what you have now, don't need to fancy what you don't have. To be honest, there is no reason keeping both 16-45 and 18-135 unless you really want/need a cheap 16mm.

The other thing is that you need to learn at least a little bit post processing. The photos you post here would benefit a lot w/ just a lit bit process.

Good luck and happy shooting.