Kit Lenses

When buying a new dSLR, often times there will be deals for a general all purpose lens to be sold in a kit along with them. For instance, with the Nikon D80 I will be getting, you can choose just the body, an 18-55, or an 18-135. Do either of these two lenses have any business underwater? Should I just save the money and get the lens I really want, Nikkor 60mm, 10.5mm, 105mm?

When buying a new dSLR, often times there will be deals for a general all purpose lens to be sold in a kit along with them. For instance, with the Nikon D80 I will be getting, you can choose just the body, an 18-55, or an 18-135. Do either of these two lenses have any business underwater? Should I just save the money and get the lens I really want, Nikkor 60mm, 10.5mm, 105mm?

Kit lenses usually make good topside lenses....but are generally weak underwater (IMHO).

Dave

Kit lenses usually make good topside lenses....but are generally weak underwater (IMHO).

Dave

I agree, in general, but the Nikon 18-70 AF-S kit lens is unusually good and quite useable underwater. And very useful around town. Thom Hogan has a useful terra review (www.bythom.com); he say's it's nearly as good as the 17-55 f2.8 except in low light situations (and much smaller and cheaper!).

Chris

the 18-70 has done me well. i don't really use it underwater but is a nice lens to use when i am in dirty, dusty, sandy areas and don't want to ruin a good lens. i would go ahead and get one of those lenses for that reason...

I also like my 18-70 both above and below water, however, more often than not I seem to be leaving it behind when I go diving in favor of my prime lenses. When I finially get a 12-24, I will likely only use the 18-70 topside. With this in mind, if I did it over again, i would probably spend a little more and go with a much more versital topside lens like the 17-200 instead. Just an opinion......

Take care,

John

I use the 18-70mm underwater and quite like it. But the 18-200 VR for topsides is very nice!