Canon EF-S 18-55 IS: Honestly how bad?

DisasterDan · Apr 18, 2011

Ive come to a personal conclusion that i hate my 18-55 Kit lens. It never seems to work for me on the shots i take with it. I asked the local photography store owner how he felt about it and i got the same answer...crap. Since that conversation last week i have been asking more photographers i know who are in various levels of photography, and got the same answer from all of them. That answers i got was that it pretty much sucked.

So my question is: Why would Canon distribute such a "Bad" lens out with *most* of its camera's? And also why distribute out an Ef-S lens with a crop sensor body? Is it a ploy of canon to entice people to buy a full frame body? Or is the lens honestly not that bad and my opinion has been skewed by others opinions?

What are your thoughts on the matter?

KmH · Apr 19, 2011

The vast majority of the DSLR cameras sold are entry-level, crop sensored cameras. The vast majority of entry-level users don't learn the intricacies of photography, and basically use their DSLR as a fancy P&S.

Canon wants to maximize it's razor thin profits when they sell all those entry-level cameras. Including a better lens would likely mean they sell fewer cameras because they would cost more.

The 18-55 mm kit lens is actually pretty decent, if the lens is used within it's performance limitations.

The local photography store owner has a vested interest in selling you gear, and may not be being completely objective when answering your gear questions.

Derrel · Apr 19, 2011

The ORIGINAL 18-55 Canon kit zoom that came out with the earliest Rebel kits sold in the USA was a NON-IS, and NON-USM lens; overseas, where buyers were more discerning, the lens had a USM focus motor. Now, THAT original Canon 18-55 kit zoom was an incredibly bad piece of crap lens, with TERRIBLE optical performance. I bought one, and was utterly dismayed by how horrible it was on my 20D; terrible chromatic aberration, just awful. So bad that many shots looked like they'd been shot with a damaged filter in front of an otherwise okay lens. Only a few million of those were sold, but they did a LOT to ruin the reputation of the 18-55 lens in the Canon brand. I think the newer, Image Stabilizer models of the 18-55, are significantly better, with much better CA reduction, and just better optics. But still--when you look at the wider-angle end of the 18-55 kit, it's not in the same league as a "quality" lens. But, for casual users, it's amply good enough.

bentcountershaft · Apr 19, 2011

DisasterDan said:
And also why distribute out an Ef-S lens with a crop sensor body? Is it a ploy of canon to entice people to buy a full frame body?

You have it backwards. EF-S will not work on full frame, it is designed for crop sensor bodies only. Same as Nikon's DX (crop) and FX (full frame) formats.

KmH · Apr 19, 2011

Sorry but no, it's not the same.

A Canon EF-S lens will not physically mount on a Canon EF camera body.

A Nikon DX lens will mount on a Nikon FX body, and the DX lens will be fully functional, save projecting to small an image circle to fully cover the larger FX image sensor.

Nikon FX camera bodies automatically detect when a DX lens is mounted and only use the central part of the image sensor that corredsponds to the APS-C size image sensor DX lenses are designed for. However, that auto DX detect feature can be turned off and more of the FX image sensor can be used if the particular DX lens projects a larger image circle, and many of them do.

Drake · Apr 19, 2011

No, I don't think the lens is crap. I used to have a Canon 400D with the old 18-55mm II lens, and it was. The lens was terrible on almost every possible focal length. Soft on the wide end, soft on the tele end, soft wide open... It really was crap in every way.

But then Canon decided to make a new version. All they did was add the IS system and one glass element. And it makes one hell of a difference. The lens is great, sharp from the 18mm right to the 55mm mark. Sharpness wide open isn't much worse than at the sweet spot, so you no longer have to step down just to get an acceptable shot. Shooting wide open is not a problem anymore. It's not just good for it's price. It can compete with many sub $500 standard zoom lenses like the 17-85 IS USM or the 18-135 USM. And don't take my word for it, read the review on dpreview.com or photozone.de.

I have one and use it very often with my Canon 1000D. Of course, like with most cheap lens, the quality control isn't as good, so you the chances of getting a bad copy are probably pretty high. If you get a good one though, there won't be much difference after an upgrade unless you aim for the L series.

Overread · Apr 19, 2011

Reading this thread I now feel better about the hate or at least dislike I feel toward my 18-55mm (the 400D version without USM or IS). :thumbup:

Ccauceg · Apr 19, 2011

Its an entry level lens that is cheap, very cheap. Its poorly built and has very low quality glass which results in some bad image quality. I have not personally used the lens but in my experience if you buy a bargain lens your going to get bargain quality (more or less). The reason why they do this is because believe it or not, they want your money and most people who are beginners in photography cannot tell the difference between cheap and pro glass and will buy whatever they can afford. Cropped sensors in camera bodies is once again the same story, they want your money, and cropped senors are cheaper to produce.

In my opinion, buying good glass should be your top priority when buying gear, save some money drop the dough and you will do yourself a favor when it comes to your images.

However, for those of you that are happy with the lens, more power to you and keep shooting it

. This is just my opinion above.

j-dogg · Apr 19, 2011

They will mount, I can put my Tamron crop sensor lens on my 5D and all my 35mm's, but the vignetting is horrible. If EF-S lenses don't mount on pro bodies then why can I put all my L lenses on my 400d.

also, the IS 18-55 is a decent walkaround. It's not an L and the 17-55 comprehensively annihilates it, but for what it is and what it's designed for, it's a great lens. The IS version has improved optics over the non-IS

Overread · Apr 19, 2011

j-dogg - the own brand Canon EF-S lenses are made with the EF-S bayonet mount and physically won't attach to a fullframe camera body without modification to the mount on the lens itself. 3rd party lens makers simply use the EF mount for all their lenses which means that even their crop sensor only models will physically fit the bayonet mounts on EF fullframe bodies. However it should be noted that some are noted for not being compatible because of the rear element design and some problems with them hitting the mirror in fullframe bodies.

j-dogg · Apr 19, 2011

well no kidding....next time I find an EF-S lens I'll have to try it. I moved from EF-S straight into EF without owning both at the same time. Whoops, that's what TPF is for :lol:

not sure? post it on TPF

Robin Usagani · Apr 19, 2011

your DSLR+ kit lens shoots way better than those point an shoot. What is the problem?

Dao · Apr 19, 2011

It is a kit lens and it has limitation. It is not the best lens in the market but it can help the photographer to create a decent image. If the image you created with that lens has issue, it could be something else. Once you know the limitations of the lens and know how to work around them, it is not a bad tool.