that desireable. What lense would you guys recommend. Someone said the 17-85 would be a good choice. For starts I will probably be taking pictures all around NYC, some closeups, but not really portraits.

I need recommendations, don't want to buy the wrong stuff!

go to <a href="http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/">FredMiranda.com</a> and to look at photos from the lenses try <a href="http://www.pbase.com/cameras">Pbase</a>. The kit lens does take nice pictures, it just lacks the color saturation and contrast of a high quality lens. But that can be fixed by shooting raw and tweaking the images in Photoshop.

and while it's not that great it really isn't that bad, either (especially for $100). Basically, it's an average lens at a very cheap price.

I'm probably going to supplement it with a 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 to get some more tele range and to have a sharp lens for serious shooting, but the kit 18-55 will still be good for a super wide-angle and walkaround lens.

Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8. You can pick it up for about $330, that's one hundred dollars more than the Canon lens you mentioned. It is a bit soft wide open, but at f/4 people compare the quality to a Canon L lens. Plus when you do need f/2.8 in low light situations you have it. A lot of wedding photographers use this lens. I plan to buy it as soon as I sell my PocketPC :)

Then you can think about getting a super telephoto lens and they usually start at 70-XXXmm.

If I were you I'd think about getting a nice prime wide-angle for your great landscape shots.

Decisions, decisions....

:-)<ul><li><a href="http://www.pbase.com/cameras/tamron/sp_af_28-75_28_xr_di_ld_if">Tamron Photos</a></li></ul>

I'm a little hesitant to go with a company other than Canon for long-term compatibility issues. I plan on keeping whatever lens I buy for a long, long time and I know that Canon is very good about keeping all its EF lenses compatible with all its EF cameras.

I'm starting law school in a month, so all this is probably irrelevant since I won't have any time to shoot.

But even Canon has those issues. The 10D is not compatible with EF-S lenses and some of their lenses are not compatible with ETT-L II. Some third party's re-chip their lenses free of charge if there is an issue with a particular body. I'm willing to take the risk ;-)

If you want a really good walk around lens by Canon, buy the Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Image Stabilizer USM lens. It goes for around $410 new but you can find sharp used copies for around $330. Check FredMiranda.com, I always see 1 or 2 a week being sold there.

This lens sells for $60 on ebay...for that price, it's worth what you're getting. The issue is, the "right" lens is going to cost you much much more ($600). As mentioned below, the 17-40L is a fastastic lens, but requires a flash in low light. That's nearly $700, and you lose quite a bit of reach, so I wouldn't recommended it for a beginner, because you're likely to get frustrated by the lack of reach. The 17-85 IS is a good lens as well, but optically, it's not much better than the kit lens. Where is shines is the fact that it has USM and IS included, but you're paying dearly for these features. The focal range is ideal for a walk around lens though.

Sigma sells an 18-125 that I've read good things about. Not sure if you're willing to entertain 3rd party glass?

I would look at it this way...you're buying the SLR for the convenience of being able to change lenses as desired. While the 18-55 is limited in it's ability, it's also very cheap, so it will have some use as a lightweight travel lens, even after you've gone out and bought more expensive glass. And later when you have gone out and bought more expensive glass, you'll look back on the $60 you spent on this lens, and you'll laugh...because it's merely a drop in the bucket. So don't be too stressed out about buying the right lens right now. Just get the 18-55, and make the other purchases as you acquire more experience and knowledge. That's the key to making the "right" lens purchase.

<img src="http://members.verizon.net/rvillanu/images/CRW_0670.jpg">

About the 17-85mm, optically it is equivalent, you do get a bit more range. USM and IS is very nice, but again I think it's overpriced.

Remember IS does not replace aperature. You can't stop people from moving or get a higher shutter speed with that lens so lowlight images will still be blurry. For landscapes photos when a tripod isn't available, this lens will suit you.

The way I decide on a lens is first define the function of this lens and will it compliment the ones I already have. Then I look at photos from it, usually from Pbase.com or PhotoSig.com. And read reviews for the lens on FredMiranda and other places found through Google. And obviously price. The 28-135mm is a good walk around lens when you just leave the house with one lens but he 17-85mm would be better for landscapes and tight indoor shots.

Good Luck