Your opinion -Canon 18-55 f3.5 -5.6 kit lens owners

"asdf3b" <arouth RemoveThis @radiology.umsmed.edu> wrote in message
news:66280ab5-9202-4fbe-a1a9-633af2f1dae1@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> Greetings! Does any one have any opinion on this kit lens? With thanks.

Personally, I think it's a good general-purpose lens. I'll take it, if I can
only take one lens (usually for convenience). But it doesn't spend a lot of
time on my camera. For the most part, I've got the 50mm f/1.8 on board.

Still, as I've read here many times before, I rarely have the lens I need at
the time I need it. But the kit lens covers a lot of ground. It's not great,
but good.

dwight
 >> Stay informed about: Your opinion -Canon 18-55 f3.5 -5.6 kit lens owners 

asdf3b wrote:
> Greetings! Does any one have any opinion on this kit lens? With thanks.

It sux -- much worse than the Nikon and Pentax equivalents --
but Canon owners will tell you it's acceptable.
 >> Stay informed about: Your opinion -Canon 18-55 f3.5 -5.6 kit lens owners 

asdf3b wrote:
> Greetings! Does any one have any opinion on this kit lens? With thanks.

Like the others have said, it's a perfectly usable lens. It's basically
about a $100 lens, and as long as you don't expect more than that from
it, you won't be disappointed.
 >> Stay informed about: Your opinion -Canon 18-55 f3.5 -5.6 kit lens owners 

"Bill Tuthill" <ccreekin.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:47677037@news.meer.net...
> asdf3b wrote:
>> Greetings! Does any one have any opinion on this kit lens? With thanks.
>
> It sux -- much worse than the Nikon and Pentax equivalents --
> but Canon owners will tell you it's acceptable.

Ah, see now, if I owned all three - as you do - then I would be able to
compare Canon to Nikon to Pentax. But that wasn't the question, was it?

dwight
 >> Stay informed about: Your opinion -Canon 18-55 f3.5 -5.6 kit lens owners 

"dwight" <tfrog93.TakeThisOut@gEEmail.com> wrote in message
news:1cydnRPjdaDuJ_ranZ2dnUVZ_i2dnZ2d@comcast.com...
> "Bill Tuthill" <ccreekin.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:47677037@news.meer.net...
>> asdf3b wrote:
>>> Greetings! Does any one have any opinion on this kit lens? With thanks.
>>
>> It sux -- much worse than the Nikon and Pentax equivalents --
>> but Canon owners will tell you it's acceptable.
>
> Ah, see now, if I owned all three - as you do - then I would be able to
> compare Canon to Nikon to Pentax. But that wasn't the question, was it?
>
> dwight
>
>

I don't know Bill, but I find that most people who make those comments
related to this lens, have not really looked at results. I suspect some
have not even looked at the lens.

Let me repeat. I don't know Bill, nor do I know how he reached his
opinion.


--
Joseph Meehan

Dia 's Muire duit
 >> Stay informed about: Your opinion -Canon 18-55 f3.5 -5.6 kit lens owners 

I find I use that lens a lot. It is my favorite lens. I have a wider
angle zoom for some uses and some telephoto lenses, but I consider them
special purpose and they get far less use. The kit lens is so good, I often
leave my macro behind even for close up work (as long as the distance is
within the kit lens range.) That is something I would not have done with
prior Canon or Nikon lenses in that range that I have owned.

The kit lens "feels" cheap, but it works very well. It is not equal to
some other lenses, but it is far ahead of any lens I have used when it comes
to price, convince etc.

"asdf3b" <arouth DeleteThis @radiology.umsmed.edu> wrote in message
news:66280ab5-9202-4fbe-a1a9-633af2f1dae1@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> Greetings! Does any one have any opinion on this kit lens? With thanks.


--
Joseph Meehan

Dia 's Muire duit
 >> Stay informed about: Your opinion -Canon 18-55 f3.5 -5.6 kit lens owners 

On Dec 17, 7:05 pm, asdf3b <aro....DeleteThis@radiology.umsmed.edu> wrote:
> Greetings! Does any one have any opinion on this kit lens? With thanks.

The results for this lens varied for me, with focal length and
aperture - image imperfections are more visible with the lens at the
shortest focal length (18mm) and at its wider aperture setting.

The most apparent imperfection, IMO, is the amount of chromatic
aberration around the edges. It can be corrected to a degree in post,
but I'd certainly say it's the weakest lens that they manufacture.

Very useable, very portable, very handy - just don't expect perfection
in the output.
 >> Stay informed about: Your opinion -Canon 18-55 f3.5 -5.6 kit lens owners 

Joseph Meehan wrote:
> "dwight" <tfrog93.TakeThisOut@gEEmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1cydnRPjdaDuJ_ranZ2dnUVZ_i2dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> "Bill Tuthill" <ccreekin.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:47677037@news.meer.net...
>>> asdf3b wrote:
>>>> Greetings! Does any one have any opinion on this kit lens? With thanks.
>>>
>>> It sux -- much worse than the Nikon and Pentax equivalents --
>>> but Canon owners will tell you it's acceptable.
>>
>> Ah, see now, if I owned all three - as you do - then I would be able
>> to compare Canon to Nikon to Pentax. But that wasn't the question, was
>> it?
>>
>> dwight
>>
>>
>
> I don't know Bill, but I find that most people who make those
> comments related to this lens, have not really looked at results. I
> suspect some have not even looked at the lens.
>
> Let me repeat. I don't know Bill, nor do I know how he reached his
> opinion.
>
>
No Joe, you don't know Bill. But you and I and no doubt everyone else
knows someone like Bill. Prior to your post I was going to ask if Bill
actually owned the lens.
Dave Cohen
 >> Stay informed about: Your opinion -Canon 18-55 f3.5 -5.6 kit lens owners 

Dave Cohen wrote
>>
> No Joe, you don't know Bill. But you and I and no doubt everyone else
> knows someone like Bill. Prior to your post I was going to ask if Bill
> actually owned the lens.

A friend took this lens (on a Rebel) down the Grand Canyon, and I was
shocked by its flare. Sharpness isn't bad, but the Canon G7 produces
better images over a wider zoom range. Consumer Reports rated this low.
The Nikon 18-55 is much better, according to them.
 >> Stay informed about: Your opinion -Canon 18-55 f3.5 -5.6 kit lens owners 

In article <4768b596$1@news.meer.net>, Bill Tuthill
<ccreekin.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:

> A friend took this lens (on a Rebel) down the Grand Canyon, and I was
> shocked by its flare. Sharpness isn't bad, but the Canon G7 produces
> better images over a wider zoom range. Consumer Reports rated this low.
> The Nikon 18-55 is much better, according to them.

Consumer Reports doesn't know an F/stop from an F-sharp.
 >> Stay informed about: Your opinion -Canon 18-55 f3.5 -5.6 kit lens owners 

"asdf3b" <arouth.RemoveThis@radiology.umsmed.edu> wrote in message
news:66280ab5-9202-4fbe-a1a9-633af2f1dae1@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> Greetings! Does any one have any opinion on this kit lens? With thanks.

I've had three versions of the 18-55. Using the EW-60C hood with it gives
you more to hold when manual focusing.

EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II (kit lens) - It is good for the money, focuses
quick and quite close (max magnification 0.2. Works very well reversed
for high magnifications. You can hear the micromotor during focusing. Take
the filter off when flare is evident or if there are light sources within
the frame.

EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II USM - Same optically as the non USM but focus
speed is about 40-50% faster which is damn near instant and almost silent
without any loss of accuracy or increased overshoot. Might be worth the
extra money. I liked this lens especially how light and small it is (190g).
It's $139 at Adorama for new, $109 for Canon refurbished.

EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS. This is my new one and I LOVE IT!. It is
optically much better than the non IS versions. So sharp and little light
fall-off. The IS really reduces camera shake so they show less shake and
are sharper, more convenient, or possibly somewhat longer shutter speeds
handheld if desired. It also focuses closer bringing max magnification up
to 0.34. It only weighs about 10g more than the non-IS variants and a 3.8mm
longer. It doesn't have the micro USM motor so it isn't quite as fast or
silent though when focusing. The IS is silent. It's only $174.95 at
Adorama too.

All of them have some chromatic aberration at the wide end. This is easily
fixed in Adobe Camera RAW. There is some barrel distortion at 18mm too and
a little light fall-off at wide apertures at 18mm. If it bothers you, the
lens distortion filter in Photoshop can fix it. Fixing these issues makes
the images look like they were taken with a much more expensive lens.

All five of the EF-S 18-55mm lenses are supported in Canon DPP if a
supported camera is used (Rebel XTi, 400D, 40D, 30D) which means that the
distortions, light falloff, and chromatic aberrations can be corrected
automatically for those lenses.
 >> Stay informed about: Your opinion -Canon 18-55 f3.5 -5.6 kit lens owners