Kits with 50mm lenses...

[dmm96452]

I wonder why you don't see them as highly recommended as a good (or even decent) 50mm lens is.

[Frog]

My guess, admittedly a life educated one, is that 90% of the people that end up buying a dslr have based their photography education on the great pics they show the cameras have taken in ads.
When they start shopping, they see all the offers with kit lenses that zoom and think that is ideal. It is ideal for those that just want a decent camera so they can shoot stuff they see.

Those that are trying to get the best image possible will consider the kit lenses if they are ranked high enough, or will order a body only. I wanted the best I could get when I bought and did get the kit lens but knew that I'd be adding to my arsenal, gradually.

I happen to think the 50 would make a good lens for a beginner, no matter which brand they go with. However, those kits would not sell as well. At least the 50 is cheap, cheaper than the kit lenses, actually. So when those that want to improve the quality of their shots, can probably afford it.

[Photo-John]

I thought this discussion was a better fit for the DSLRs forum. Hope you don't mind that I moved it.

It is a good subject, though. My first camera - a Pentax Program Plus - came with a 50mm lens. But back then most zoom lenses were junk. That's not the case anymore. And although I agree that the image quality of a fast 50mm lens is excellent and it's good to learn to zoom with your feet, I don't know if a 50mm is really the best thing for most users. And that's who kits are made for. Most people - especially if we're talking about consumer DSLRs like the T2i / 550D you just bought - want the flexibility of a zoom. They want a camera that can do it all and a zoom is better for that than a 50mm. The 50mm focal prime lens is really more of a high-end tool now than it used to be. The 18-55 kit zoom is the lens of the masses.

And we haven't even talked about the crop factor with APS-C sensor cameras. For a real 50mm experience, you need a 30mm or 35mm lens. And there aren't a ton of options available. Especially not inexpensive options.

[Franglais]

When manufacturers propose a kit of camera + lens they choose lens which gives a "normal" view. On 24x36mm film this was the 50mm. Nowadays on DSLR's it's a zoom that goes from wideangle through normal to telephoto.

The 50mm is a short tele lens on most DSLR's. It doesn't make sense for a manufacturer to offer it in a kit. I've seen the 50mm f1.4 proposed in a kit with 24x36mm sensor DSLR's, where it is a "normal" focal length.

[straightarm]

Even for full frame cameras, 50mm is slightly too long. The diagonal of a 24 x 36mm frame is 43 mm. The 50mm came to be standard simply because Leica had an lens of that focal length available at the time the first 35mm camera was introduced.

for the 1.3 crop models an ideal standard lens would have a focal length of 33.5mm

and for a 1.6 crop, 27mm

[Speed]

I wonder why you don't see them as highly recommended as a good (or even decent) 50mm lens is.

Unfortunately, with the crop factor of most digital cameras, the 50mm is too limitiing. Plus, as has already been mentioned, everyone wants a zoom. Which is a shame, because between the digital "crop" factor and the kit lens zooms, the prime lenses are losing ground in popularity.

When I bought my first SLR (Nikon N80) I got a 70-300mm and a 50mm f1.4 with it. I knew I was going to be doing astrophotography work, so I wanted a fast lens. And while I have more zooms than primes for my Nikons, I have added a 105mm f2.8 macro along the way, and I recently bought a 35mm f1.8.

For weddings, my primes gets used. You just can't beat a fast prime in a low light (no flash) situation!