|
that other reviews complain about. Were the 18mm-55mm is.I use my 18mm-55mm almost all the time. That is all that needs to be said about this lens. I like that the 18mm-55mm is smaller and auto focus is faster compare to the 250mm lens.
I know nothing about ISO, shutter speeds, Ring lag etc.I'm so not a professional Photographer far from it. With my 18-55mm lens I get a prefect picture every time, I have never been Disappointed (with my 250mm I have been).I wonder if maybe some of the people who have trouble with this lens is because you need to leave the ISO and speed alone and just let the camera do all the work; try auto once and awhile. I don't think it feels cheap and I don't care if ISO are slow, etc. I just set my Canon Rebel to Auto and push the button.But what I do know is I have a canon 55mm-250mm lens (which cost way More then the canon 18mm-55mm lens) and the 250mm is better at getting far far away shots.
When I download my 18-55mm lens pics of my son's baseball game to his team web page and get emails asking me "who was the photographer that took those great pictures." me a photographer. Because I have no problems with getting prefect pictures every time I use auto setting with this lens. But not so great on up close birthday pictures and fast action baseball shots. I only pull the 250mm lens out when I have to shot something really far away which isn't often.
For things that aren't moving much, in low light I think this lens is better than the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Camera Lens. This is a great lens. 18mm is wide enough for landscapes or crowds at concerts, and 55mm is usually long enough.Although the specifications look similar to the non-IS version that comes with the Rebel XT/XTi, this lens is quite a bit better.I've also done a lot of macro photography by mounting this lens to the camera body backwards (with an adapter I bought for I find that f/3.5-f/5.6 with image stabilization is usually superior to f/1.8 without it.The zoom range (18mm-55mm) is very practical. I use it for pretty much everything other than birds (I use a Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras for that). The only time I had trouble with it was at an aquarium, where the low light meant slow shutter speeds (moving fish + slow shutter speeds = blurry fish).
I had just picked up the 50 f/1.8 and realized how horrible the kit lens was at reproducing color, and it was blurry as hell. Now that I have this lens, I'm not as anxious to take the plunge on an L series lens.
And if I do, I'm going for the 17-55 f/2.8 which runs for over $1000. I know I will eventually, but I'm not as quick to upgrade now.
So far, I really dig it. But I know that the IS alone will improve my snapshots.
But like I said, this lens is keeping me happy for now. I was actually thinking of skipping this lens and buying the next best thing, which would be the 17-40L, but I didn't have the $700, so I'd be saving up for a few months, and I didn't want to take another photo with my kit lens.
So far I'm very pleased with the image stabilization, and I've heard that the optics are better, but I haven't played around with it enough to notice (any improvements might just be because it's a new lens, my kit lens is 3 years old and dusty due to it's cheap design).
This is not the prettiest lens, nor does it inspire much confidence in manual use. You can comfortably take sharp photos of non-moving subjects in indoor or other low-light settings.The bad:Construction leaves much to be desired, which is not a surprise for a kit lens. Chromatic abberations are pretty well controlled, but are easily corrected if necessary. Also, the close-focus capability is quite good; I've captured some decent macro shots with this. It's also "kitted" with the XSi and the upcoming T1i.
Another result of this is that it makes using a polarizing filter more complicated. This lens is apparently a pretty big step forward from the previous non-IS kit lens. Even among third party lenses there aren't many options that look very attractive. However, the tests and reviews I've seen indicate the 17-85 performs worse than this lens on the wide end, while its saving grace is good performance on the telephoto end. Unfortunately, though, this "consumer" lens comes at an "L" price ($1000+).
If you have the older 18-55mm non-IS lens and are looking for an upgrade, I would recommend that you look for something else.That leads me to my final complaint, which is not regarding this lens but rather the Canon line in general. In other words, if you have the money to buy that camera, you might want to consider buying a better lens for it.The good:My first impression of the EF-S 18-55 IS was that it was very insubstantial. Perhaps the most attractive feature is the image stabilization, which is very effective. The lens is a bit soft on the telephoto end (except between about f/8 and f/11 where it's somewhat sharper), which can be disappointing compared to the wideangle performance. And indeed it performs pretty well optically. I received this lens along with my Rebel XS, and it contributed to the incredible value of that camera.
Optically there isn't too much to complain about. Unfortunately, the poor build quality reduces the lens' usefulness (bad manual focus, ineffective lens hood and difficult to use polarizers) and spoils the photographic experience quite a bit. You'll hardly notice it on your Rebel. Distortion on the wide end is noticeable but easily corrected. You get some marks next to the zoom ring to tell you the approximate focal length, and, well, nothing else. Given the price of the latter, it may be a dubious pairing.
The EF-S 17-85mm is an obvious choice. Probably the biggest disappointment, though, is the rotating front element, which precludes the possibility of an effective lens hood. Also, although resolution is generally good, the contrast level and color saturation of this lens are somewhat disappointing compared to other offerings.Overall, this lens is good enough that I think it's worthwhile to get it as part of a kit, especially if you have reservations about paying more for a better lens. This issue is compounded by the fact that 55mm is rather short, so it's likely you'll spend a lot of time there if you're trying to get closer to your subject. Canon simply doesn't offer many good upgrade options to this lens. Finally, the 18-200mm offers a greatly expanded zoom range at the expense of image quality at most focal lengths, and with only slightly better build quality than the 18-55 IS.
The EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS will give you about the same range as this one, but with superb optics and a larger maximum aperture. To be honest, this issue is annoying enough that, compounded with a couple other issues, I have seriously considered switching brands.Anyway, gripes aside, this is a decent kit lens that should not automatically be overlooked. The EF 28-135mm, which was made for full-frame use, sacrifices the entire wide-angle range on an APS-C sensor for even more telephoto. It's pretty compact and light weight. In fact, if Canon made a well-built version of this lens with USM I would gladly pay twice the price for it. Manual focus, which is performed with a plastic ring on the end of the lens, was obviously an afterthought.
I like it most from the wide end to about 35mm, where its resolution leaves very little to be desired. From an operational standpoint, it's pretty barebones.
I do appreciate the relatively small size and light weight of this lens on my rather heavy Canon 40D camera (compared to my Canon EF 70-300mm IS USM lens). Also, this is the first Canon lens I have received without an instruction sheet, I suppose that could be a problem for someone without any knowledge of Canon's IS and AF/MF systems, or how to mount the lens. In dim light this lens still auto-focuses quickly.
Overall, I am very happy with it. I have noticed just a bit of play in the Auto Focus mechanism: if I lightly twist the front of the lens from left to right or vice-versa, it turns just the slightest amount and the front element will extend or retract a small fraction of an inch, changing the focus I assume. I received my lens this morning, and have spent the day trying it out.
But in operation I haven't noticed any problem with the focus, it appears to be spot on. This lens will probably become my new walk-around lens because of weight and size. The photo quality is very good, ease of use is also very good.
I am used to using Canon's jewel-like FD lenses from years ago, so I am a little put-off by the build quality of this lens; but when I consider the low price I guess the build quality is decent enough.
|
