Originally Posted by rodi
kit lenses are like marketing gimmicks. they're just there to make that initial DSLR purchase possible, so that you feel like you're getting your money's worth versus those advanced point and shoots that have a 30-200mm or more lens bolted to it.
I agree with you when you look at most entry/mid-level dSLRs. But, the 24-105mm f/4L "kit lens" is no slouch.
This is not directed towards you or anyone in particular... but, just a comment/observation on my part. Whenever someone here asks about a lens recommendation (specifically Canon, since I'm not familiar with Nikons), inevitably people here (including myself) recommend L lenses. There is a reason for that, of course they are better in almost every way (there are exceptions). However, for a new photographer I feel like that it's overkill. If you were a pro, can you get better results from an L lens over a kit lens? Sure. But, if you're learning, I see no problem using a kit lens. Not everyone needs
an f/2.8, f/2, hell even an f/4.