( 60 reviews )
-
Posted: Jun 15 2009
I know nothing about ISO, shutter speeds, Ring lag etc...I'm so not a professional Photographer far from it. 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. But not so great on up close birthday pictures and fast action baseball shots. Were the 18mm-55mm is!! I use my 18mm-55mm almost all the time. I only pull the 250mm lens out when I have to shot something really far away which isn't often. I like that the 18mm-55mm is smaller and auto focus is faster compare to the 250mm lens. 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!! That is all that needs to be said about this lens!! I don't think it feels cheap and I don't care if ISO are slow, etc.. that other reviews complain about. 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. Because I have no problems with getting prefect pictures every time I use auto setting with this lens.
-
Posted: May 31 2009
This is a great lens. 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). 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. 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. 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 <$15 from another site) and the results are impressive. It's difficult to use since that isn't the intended use, but the pictures are incredible (when your field of view is 1/4th of an inch wide, you can see the individual eyes of a fly, or the hairs on a small spider's leg).
-
Posted: Apr 29 2009
So far, I really dig it. 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. 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. 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). But I know that the IS alone will improve my snapshots. Now that I have this lens, I'm not as anxious to take the plunge on an L series lens. I know I will eventually, but I'm not as quick to upgrade now. And if I do, I'm going for the 17-55 f/2.8 which runs for over $1000. But like I said, this lens is keeping me happy for now.
