Walk around lens

markjo159 wrote:

Nothing is wrong with it, was just wondering if there was a "better" lens out there...

certainly, but like most things in life, there are tradeoffs. You have to decide what specific aspect of the 18-55 you wish to improve upon, and what you might be willing to give up in return.

If it's about the zoom range, you have to decide if you want more range at the wide end or the long end, and whether you are willing to give up some of the range you already have at the other end to get it (eg, going with 16-45 or 28-75). Or, how much larger/heavier a lens you are willing to use in order to get more range and how much you'd be willing to pay (eg, a 17-70, or an 18-135, 18-200 or 18-250).

If it's about the maximum aperture, you have to consider to ask yourself if you'd be willing to go with a prime (single focal length - no zoom at all) in order to improve more significantly on the maximum aperture. Or if something like the 16-50/2.8 or third party equivalent zoom would be worth the much greater cost and much greater size/weight.

If it's just about image quality, chance are there are at least a dozen things you could improve in your own technique that would make a bigger difference than a new lens - and indeed, without making those improvements, a new lens might not help at all or even make things worse (eg, larger maximum aperture creating shallower DOF thus better exposing any failure to choose a focus point appropriately).