Need advice regarding Canon EF-S 18-55 3.5-5.6 IS lens

eoren1

I'll start by saying that I can't believe I'm actually considering buying this lens but here goes...

Current gear: Canon 350D, 50mm f/1.8 mk I, Sigma 30mm f/1.4 and Canon 70-210 3.5-4.5 (oldie but goody). Mostly use the primes and mostly shoot photos of my kids. I have the original kit lens which I use for the occasional landscape shot stopped down to f/8. I've actually been impressed with the results considering its price but the resolution hasn't been spectacular.

I just saw this review over at photozone:
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_1855_3556is/index.htm
It looks like the updated 18-55 3.5-5.6 IS has much improved sharpness and 3 stop IS thus making for a wonderful step-up from my current kit lens for under $200.

Has anyone done this move? Any thoughts on the quality of photos from the new kit lens? I do not plan on spending the money for the 17-55 f/2.8 and had considered the 10-22 but that still leaves some gaps in the range and costs a lot more.
Thanks for the input.
E

aktse

I don't know anything about that lens, but I have always been taught to buy good glass.

Have you considered the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8? It doesn't have the IS, but IS isn't necessary for everyone.

eoren1

aktse wrote:

I don't know anything about that lens, but I have always been taught to buy good glass.

Have you considered the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8? It doesn't have the IS, but IS isn't necessary for everyone.

Thanks for the reply. I had considered that lens in the past but it just didn't make sense with my style/lineup. It's not fast enough to take over for my primes in that range and, without IS, it's still too hard to handhold at f/5.6-f/8 for landscape shots.
E

urbanaries

What about the 17-85 3.5-5.6 IS? I personally needed a faster wide angle zoom, but I always thought the build and image quality of this lens was wonderful for the price, and the extra reach was nice too! if only they made a 17-85 2.8 IS...........

aktse

eoren1 wrote:

Thanks for the reply. I had considered that lens in the past but it just didn't make sense with my style/lineup. It's not fast enough to take over for my primes in that range and, without IS, it's still too hard to handhold at f/5.6-f/8 for landscape shots.
E

What shutter speeds are you trying to hand hold? The IS helps a bit, but I find that it's not all that magically (maybe a stop or two at most). For longer exposure landscapes, I've learned that a tripod is my friend (and a very good friend at that!)

It's more expensive, but since you don't need the speed and want the range and IS, what do you think about the canon EF 17-85 IS? This is my walk-around lens and you should be able to find a used copy.

eoren1

That's two votes for the 17-85...
I had always heard mixed reviews on that one. Sharpness did not seem to be great - maybe slightly better than the original kit lens? Older IS that gives about 2 stops advantage. Also, it's $500 new (and likely 350-400 used) so above what I'm willing to spend.
As far as handholding for landscape shots, i completely agree about using a good tripod and most of my good kit lens shots are from a tripod mounted 350d. That being said, if I can get sharp images at f/8 and 1/15 to 1/30th second, that would make for a very light and compact kit for early evening photos....
E

Tee Why

I just got it today. After reading the photozone and slrgear's reviews, I thought it was worth a try. For normal walking around, I use a 10-20, 20mm f1.8, a 50mm f1.8 lenses, a 50mm macro, or a lensbaby on two bodies.

I wanted a light and cheap walking around zoom so I can use a 400D as a point and shoot. I recently retried an old kit lens and was disappointed with the lens overall.

The new lens feels very similar but their is a new coating/spray on the barrel much like the L lens, the zoom ring feels nicer. The rest of the lens feels just as cheap though. The IS is very silent but works well. In terms of optics, I noticed that it's very sharp and there is less CA than the first generation of the kit lens. I haven't extensively shot with it, as I was working today and it was dark and raining today. I plan on shooting it tomorrow though. The AF is very quiet and fairly quick. Overall, it feels cheap but better than the old kit lens.

I'm using this lens on a 400D as my point and shoot, so considering I'm getting a 18-55 range with IS and pretty much excellent corner to corner sharpness pretty much at all apertures and focal lengths with a 4 stop IS for $179 from B&H that I can use in DPP to correct for barrel distortion, CA, and vignetting, I'd say this is the best bargain for a Canon dslr with a cropped sensor.

When I'm out shooting for fun, I'll leave the kit lens at home and stick to my primes. When I want a light camera for carrying around just in case. I'll use the new kit lens on a 400D sans a grip for the ease and convince.

eoren1

Tee Why wrote:

I just got it today. After reading the photozone and slrgear's reviews, I thought it was worth a try. For normal walking around, I use a 10-20, 20mm f1.8, a 50mm f1.8 lenses, a 50mm macro, or a lensbaby on two bodies.

I wanted a light and cheap walking around zoom so I can use a 400D as a point and shoot. I recently retried an old kit lens and was disappointed with the lens overall.

The new lens feels very similar but their is a new coating/spray on the barrel much like the L lens, the zoom ring feels nicer. The rest of the lens feels just as cheap though. The IS is very silent but works well. In terms of optics, I noticed that it's very sharp and there is less CA than the first generation of the kit lens. I haven't extensively shot with it, as I was working today and it was dark and raining today. I plan on shooting it tomorrow though. The AF is very quiet and fairly quick. Overall, it feels cheap but better than the old kit lens.

I'm using this lens on a 400D as my point and shoot, so considering I'm getting a 18-55 range with IS and pretty much excellent corner to corner sharpness pretty much at all apertures and focal lengths with a 4 stop IS for $179 from B&H that I can use in DPP to correct for barrel distortion, CA, and vignetting, I'd say this is the best bargain for a Canon dslr with a cropped sensor.

When I'm out shooting for fun, I'll leave the kit lens at home and stick to my primes. When I want a light camera for carrying around just in case. I'll use the new kit lens on a 400D sans a grip for the ease and convince.

Thanks for the review. Any thoughts on whether the contrast of the lens is any better. I know it's no 'L' but does it seem to offer better photos than the kit aside from the improved sharpness?

Tee Why

Contrast seems very good to me.
Here is my more formal review
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=77783