Kit lenses D350 vs. D650
I have an old D350 with kit lenses (never got past the beginner capability level till now) and especially at low light it doesn't take very good pictures (dim colors and obviously, no way without a tripod). And here I am not talking night, room light already is a big problem.
With "slow" f/3.5-5.6 lens indoors you can get good pics using a flash. Not so much the built-in, get a high power accessory flash that can be angled for bounce. Like the 430EX II, or similar from 3rd party makers.
Otherwise, in low light you can use the improved high ISO ability of the 650D, and/or you need a lens with wider maximum aperture. One of the 17-50ish f/2.8 zooms, or a prime (single focal length) lens with maximum aperture of f/1.4 (e.g. Sigma 30 f/1.4 EX DC HSM), f/2 (e.g. EF 35 f/2 IS USM, EF 28 f/1.8 USM), or f/2.8 (e.g. EF 40 f/2.8 STM).
Many people keep telling me the kit lens on the D350 really sucked and that newer one could help me improve my pictures here. Is that true? What makes the D350 kit lens so bad and would newer one help? If so, could you please recommend one?
The original EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 has just so-so optical performance/sharpness, and it doesn't have image stabilization. The current EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS (mk I, II or the new STM) are much better optically, and image stabilization 'fixes' images that otherwise would have blur from unsteady hold with slower shutter speed.
Unapologetic Canon Apologist
|Bald Eagle by anisah|
from Features - lips/mouth
|heron and fish by APenza|
from A Big Year - birds
|Cows Cowering Under Rare California Super Cell by RBFresno|
from -The Old Cows-