Marco.org

Jan 04 2008 ∞
Canon’s new $180 image-stabilized kit lens. I had no idea this existed until Tal Atlas asked me about it. Basically, it’s a newer version of Canon’s 18-55 kit lens, but with an image stabilizer (IS) added. That’s an incredibly compelling feature, and at $180, it’s the cheapest IS lens by a lot. (The next step up is the $500 17-85 IS, or my personal favorite, the amazing $950 17-55 IS.) Summary: Optical quality is terrible. Not sharp, lots of CA. Its maximum aperture of f/3.5 is mediocre - and as you zoom in, it gradually narrows to f/5.6, which is very slow. It doesn’t use a USM focus motor, so autofocus is slow and loud. Manual-focus control is awful. Build quality is terrible. Its barrel is all plastic. The front element rotates, so you can’t effectively use many filters, including polarizers. But it’s only $180 - that’s pocket change in the lens market. It’s also very small and light. For the price, it’s a great deal. If you’re really on a budget and absolutely will not be able to afford a nicer lens in the foreseeable future… you probably shouldn’t have bought an SLR. But if you did anyway, this might be a good buy. Under any other circumstances, though, I suggest that you save your $180 and put it toward the $950 17-55 IS USM, the best general-purpose SLR lens on the market from any manufacturer.

Canon’s new $180 image-stabilized kit lens. I had no idea this existed until Tal Atlas asked me about it.

Basically, it’s a newer version of Canon’s 18-55 kit lens, but with an image stabilizer (IS) added. That’s an incredibly compelling feature, and at $180, it’s the cheapest IS lens by a lot. (The next step up is the $500 17-85 IS, or my personal favorite, the amazing $950 17-55 IS.)

Summary:

  • Optical quality is terrible. Not sharp, lots of CA.
  • Its maximum aperture of f/3.5 is mediocre - and as you zoom in, it gradually narrows to f/5.6, which is very slow.
  • It doesn’t use a USM focus motor, so autofocus is slow and loud.
  • Manual-focus control is awful.
  • Build quality is terrible. Its barrel is all plastic.
  • The front element rotates, so you can’t effectively use many filters, including polarizers.

But it’s only $180 - that’s pocket change in the lens market. It’s also very small and light. For the price, it’s a great deal.

If you’re really on a budget and absolutely will not be able to afford a nicer lens in the foreseeable future… you probably shouldn’t have bought an SLR. But if you did anyway, this might be a good buy.

Under any other circumstances, though, I suggest that you save your $180 and put it toward the $950 17-55 IS USM, the best general-purpose SLR lens on the market from any manufacturer.

Creative Commons License All original content is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 U.S. License except that which is quoted from elsewhere or attributed to others. In short, you may reproduce, reblog, and modify my content, but you must provide proper attribution.