EDIT: Never mind, I have done a bit of research and checked out some reviews and they all said the lens is not very great. (Betting also it is from 2007, and no IS)


So, as most of you know I have decided to go with the Canon Rebel XSi DSLR (My first DSLR)
It includes a 18-55mm lens.

NOW, heres the hard part.
I can either choose to buy the camera to include a Accessory kit designed for the xsi, it includes:
-7 Pocket DSLR padded camera bag
-Extra Battery
-UV Filter fit for the 18-55mm lens.

NOW, for about 10$ More, I can get a "Canon EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 II USM Lens" INSTEAD of the accessory pack!
Now, I am not sure which one to chose, the extra lens, or the bag + accessories!!?!?!

The only thing that is stopping me from getting the one with a lens is that it does
not seem to have "Image Stabilization" so I REALLY don't want to buy it , then get blurry pictures.

So please, your opinions help!!

PS: It's 9:43 PM Here, on October 14th.
I get Paid tonight at midnight (direct deposit etc.)
So Tomorrow (October 15th) I will be going out to pick the camera up, and one of the options (Lens or accessory)
Thanks!

This post was edited by TheBlackRose66 on Oct 14 2008 09:59pm

Hmm........... interesting. I spose if you get a lens, you might want to get a decent one... I mean, a good one! IS is handy, yep. But you can also take good pictures without the IS,

I'd probably go with the bag, filter, etc. I ended up buying myself another battery in the long run. Not sure how fussy you are about camera bags, but if you seem to like the one they have then why not. I also bought a filter right when I bought my cam Nice package deal you got there. DAMNIT I wish I got my camera in Calgary. Haha.

I think you should get the camera bag package since that lens is kinda crappy. I mean it cost less than 200 dollars alone so it cant be good at all lol besides the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 II USM Lens is an older version since there is version III now. if you want a telephoto lens you should get a better, sharper one like one of those 70-200 L lenses and yes IS comes very handy on telephoto lenses not sure if its a must though since usually you would be using it with a tripod. I love IS lenses only because I often take night or low light photos handheld and with IS on I can actually take sharp pics with shutterspeed at 1/3 so IS isnt only for old people with shaky hands or people with seizure

This post was edited by Futurama on Oct 15 2008 12:07am

I dont think u need an extra battery for the camera, allso uv filter isnt that needed for crap lenses like the kit lens. Digital cameras have uv filter on the sensor, so using uv filter is same as using eny protective filter(that u can prolly get a bit cheaper than uv). What comes to is, its only good imo if u need to shoot in low light or u got a telephoto(longer zoom makes the lens shake more naturally). That 18-55mm lens doesent have is, unless they say that seperatly(is kit versions cost more). I wouls suggest that if u need good allaround lens and u dont want a prime, then u should get 17-50 2.8 instead of the kit lens. 2.8 is the lowest u can get on a zoom, but u could get f-1.8 for primes quite cheap, allso primes have better image quality than same price zooms. Lower f-number means that u get more light in the camera and u get smaller focused field(background blur). If u would want a good prime for normal usage u could get sigma 30mm 1.4. I tested and for same amout in light to camera with f-3.5 i needed to use 1/100sec time and with f-1.8 i could use 1/400sec, with kit lens at 55mm zoom u have min of f-5.6 and needed 1/50secs of light for same amount than f1.8 and 1/400 seconds, thats allmoast 10 times more light with 1.8. Kit lens and 50mm 1.8 is good and cheap starter set imo. U can buy the bag seperatly, they wont cost that much.

The bag is regular $130, comes free with my camera package.
Or the lens, which is $200 regular, but all the reviews I checked said it was pretty usless.
Not to mention it was made back in 2007, pretty old for a newer camera imo.

Nice package deal, enjoy your new cam

lol, best lens I ever had was from 1996 (135 f/2 L)