 Best Sellers | | Home Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS SLR Lens | |
|  | |  | | | Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS SLR Lens | | | | | SKU:
2042B00221918dandh | | In Stock | | Availability:
Usually ships in 1-2 business days | | | | | | Equipped with Canon's Optical Image Stabilizer (IS) technology, the Canon EF-S 18-55mm standard zoom lens is ideal for just about any application. IS technology compensates for camera shake by providing the equivalent effect of a shutter speed up to four stops faster. This allows you to take sharp handheld shots even in low-light conditions--a must for sports and nature photography. The lens also offers an aspherical lens element that corrects for aberration, thus producing a topnotch image throughout the zoom range, and a circular aperture that exquisitely renders out-of-focus backgrounds. Despite its minimal size, weight, and cost, the lens expands the picture-taking possibilities any time slow shutter speeds are needed. | | | |
List Price:
| $280.00 | |
Our Price:
| $116.48 | |
You Save:
| $163.52 (58%)
|
| | |
|
| | Product Details | | Product Length: | 0.0 inches | | Product Width: | 0.0 inches | | Product Height: | 0.0 inches | | Product Weight: | 0.8 pounds | | Package Length: | 4.6 inches | | Package Width: | 3.7 inches | | Package Height: | 3.5 inches | | Package Weight: | 0.65 pounds | | Average Customer Rating: |  based on 153 reviews |
| |
| | Features | Focal Length & Maximum Aperture - 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6Lens Construction - 16 elements in 12 groups, including UD-glass and aspherical lensesDiagonal Angle of View - 74 20' - 7 50' (with APS-C image sensors)Focus Adjustment - Gear-drivenClosest Focusing Distance - 1.48 ft./0.45m (maximum close-up magnification 0.24x)
| |
| | Customer Reviews | Average Customer Review: ( 153 customer reviews )
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
179 of 183 found the following review helpful:
 Great lens, especially for the very low price Jan 19, 2008
By Trustme
"notapundit"
PROS
* Very sharp across the image, even wide open.
* Low Chroma. I read a test ([...]) that found higher than normal amounts of CA in this lens at some apertures, but I don't see it. My standard test is to shoot bare tree limbs on bright sunny days & look for purple fringing, especially at the edges. I'm not seeing anywhere near the level of fringing shown in some of their test shots.If anything, I'd call it "low" I read elsewhere that one of Canon's goals in adding the aspherical element to this lens was to reduce CA, so I'm thinking maybe the lens tested in photozon.de was just a bad apple.
* Image Shake control works. I can't attest to how often it provides a full 4 stops worth of shake reduction, but I can see a very clear result when using it.
* Fast accurate focusing. One of the reasons I purchased this lens was because I was dissatisfied with the performance of my (more expensive) Sigma 17-35 EX (the newer model), which while sharp, is just too slow and inaccurate a focuser for close work in action sports. The new Canon solved that problem.
* Compact, light weight & unobtrusive. Not much bigger than a normal lens.
CONS
* Barrel Distortion at 18mm (28mm) While not exsessive for an inexpensive lens, this is one area where you will see benefit from spending hundreds of dollars for a much more expensive Canon "IS" or "L," or buying a fixed focal length lens. In most real world situations, it wasn't all that noticeable. I could usually correct for it in Photoshop, but this is not a lens for critical architectural work etc. I have taken hundreds of photos with this lens and barrel distortion has only called attention to itself a few times. I suspect this is one price paid for the very compact design.
* Not very fast. Another area where an "L" has an edge. At F3.5 28mm equivalent and F5.6 85mm this lens is relatively slow compared to a pro lens. This effects stopping the action in low light. OTH, you will have to spend hundreds more to get a usable top speed of F 2.8 and that is *only* one stop faster at 28mm equiv. I think both this lens' sharpness and the IS system mitigate this "Con." It took me a while to learn that I could shoot wide open at all focal lengths without having the outer third of the image turn to mush.That's pretty amazing for a zoom at this price. You don't have a stop or two you almost never use because it is too soft. And the IS system works well in low light, though that doesn't figure in in stopping the action.
* Does not have that red stripe. Sad to say, some will never buy this sharp, handy little lens because in is not an "L" and/or doesn't cost $[...]. Yes, it does does look a little "plasticy," probably doesn't have the build quality for heavy, everyday use by a real working pro, and does not look massive mounted on your camera body, like a "fast" pro lens that's squeezing out that last F stop. But IMO, it looks very similar to Canon's newer IS lenses, so there is no scarlet letter immediately identifying you as "cheap." In other words, "Get over it."
So, why did Canon produce such a good lens at such a bargain price? I'd say that it's because Nikon announced their intention to do the same a little while ago. Also, Canon's old non IS 18-55mm lens had the rep of being something of a dog. Finally, several competing cameras now have IS built into the body. Canon had to respond with a sharp IS lens that they could put on the Rebels & the 40D. In terms of sales, the low end of the DSLR market is both hot and very competitive. We're the beneficiaries.
83 of 88 found the following review helpful:
 Maggot Colony Aug 02, 2008
By Mr. A. Pomeroy
This lens has caused a mild stir on the internet in the last few months. To my mind, it's the zoom equivalent of Canon's 50mm f1.8, in the sense that it's very cheap but performs very well. On an optical level it has no obvious deficits apart from a bit of bulge at the wider settings. Physically it is small and light, and the image stabilisation works well. As a package, at this price level, it's hard to resist if you want a cheap decent walkaround lens. The only obvious competition I can think of is the Sigma 18-50mm, but that doesn't have image stabilisation, and from what I have seen it's blurry around the edges; at the very least, it offers nothing over the Canon 18-55mm IS and it's no cheaper.
This is the third version of Canon's 18-55mm camera kit lens. The first two editions of the lens were regularly derided on the internet for poor sharpness at the corners, chromatic aberrations, and general naff build quality. I can't confirm any of that, because I haven't used the older versions, although the samples I have seen were unimpressive. You can find these lenses going cheaply on eBay, because no-one wants them. In contrast, the 18-55mm IS has exceeded expectations, and has received good reviews, notably from Digital Photography Review and Photozone.de. They go into a lot of detail about the image sharpness and so forth, I will not try to duplicate their work.
I've had mine for a week or so now, and I've tested it and used it generally out and about. I like it, with some reservations. It's smaller and less conspicuous than my Sigma 18-125mm. It has far less distortion than my Canon 24-85mm. It's more versatile than my old Super Takumar f1.4, although in most other respects the Takumar squashes it like a bug, not least because it is made of metal. The 18-55mm's big drawback is its physical design. It's has a nice rubber zoom ring, and it feels tougher than my Canon 50mm f1.8. However, the front part of the lens, with the manual zoom ring, wobbles a bit. As the reviews have pointed out, the front of the lens rotates as it focusses (and moves back and forth a surprising amount), which makes it a bother to use polarising filters. It's a shame Canon didn't enlarge the body slightly, and completely enclose the front of the lens.
The motor whines a bit as it focuses, about the same level as my Sigma 18-125mm. There's one thing in particular that irritates me - most zoom lenses are physically shortest at the widest zoom level, and so it's easy to store the lens away. You just rotate the zoom collar until it stops, and stick on the lens cap. In contrast, the 18-55mm is shortest about half-way through its travel, and there's no way to lock it in place, which means that I have to pack it away partially-zoomed; my worry is that the manual focussing ring will catch on something, and break the whole front of the lens off.
Still, gripes over. The image quality pleased me. I wasn't being systematic, but there was nothing in the pictures I took that stood out as being particularly bad. There was some barrel distortion at the widest setting, but it was mild. At the rest of the zoom range I could not easily tell if there was distortion of not. It's nice and sharp in the middle, and sharpens up very well with software. The corners are slightly less sharp, but not noticeably so unless you're really looking for it. Having said that, my copy of the lens was blurrier in the left and bottom-left edge of the image, and had more purple and red fringing in that corner. Otherwise, even with a classic "tree against overexposed sky" shot, I could see only the tiniest amount of purple fringing. The out-of-focus bokeh is nice and smooth. The closest focusing distance is only a couple of inches or so, which is useful if you want to take semi-pseudo macro shots.
The image stabilisation is the icing on the cake. I managed to squeeze out shots at 1/10th, 1/5th that were usable. Alternatively, I could shoot stopped down at f5.6 or f8.0 in moderately dim light, for maximum sharpness. The lens benefits greatly from image stabilisation, because f5.6 at 55mm (88mm equivalent) is very slow indeed. Canon argues that IS turns this into f2.0 at 55mm. I'm not sure of that, but it isn't far off. Still, I was pleasantly surprised with the IS. It's of a type whereby there is one option - on or off - and you don't have to set a special mode if it's on a tripod, or if you're panning. Given the short telephoto zoom I can't see this being a useful sports lens, but within its limits the IS works well.
You don't get a lens hood. There is a lens hood available, but it's about twenty quid. It looks like a tea saucer with a hole in the middle. In fact it looks about as useful as a tea saucer with a hole in the middle, either for shading the lens, or for holding a cup of tea. I would be wary of fitting it onto the lens, for fear of nudging the hood and breaking off the front part of the lens. I haven't tested the lens for flare - the weather hasn't been very good - but I can imagine this being a weakness.
One other thing. The lens was dust-free when I took it out of the box, unlike my Sigma lens, which had some dust inside it. I suspect that over time the 18-55mm will become a dust trap, because it doesn't look very well sealed. Mind you, in five years it'll be worth pennies, not because there's anything wrong with it, but because it's so cheap (in fact it's notable that the lens is actually more expensive on eBay than it is here - perhaps Canon is finding it hard to make them fast enough). That's also how I feel about it being an EF-S lens; perhaps one day Canon will ditch EF-S, but by that time the 18-55mm will cost nothing to replace.
78 of 83 found the following review helpful:
What a value! Mar 27, 2008
By Bogus Exception
I only got this lens, vowing to only do "L" glass since using my 50mm f/1.2, because it got a sizzling review in PopPhoto. It's clarity was just under a $2,000 Nikon lens reviewed on the same page.
I opened the box, and got just what I expected for under $200-a small, cheap feeling lens. It is the first EF-S I've owned, and the white mark for aligning it to mount matched up on my Canon 40D, instead of the red mark I usually use.
I haven't had time to put it through the paces, but I will say that I am really impressed with the clarity of the pictures. I have a crappy Canon 28-135mm that is just pitiful in the clarity department-and that set me back $400! I put a shot of one of my dogs up for this product in the customer images. It's the one shot portrait of just her head (German Shepherd). Handheld this thing is as clear as my 50mm f/1.2-I swear!
Another thing I didn't realize is that you can get close to your subject with this lens. No, I mean REALLY close. I can open it up to 17mm and be 4" from my subject!
As a portrait photographer, I am really thankful to have a killer IS lens to let me play with wide shots of buildings, scenery, and maybe some fun people/pet portraits that differ from my more "sensible" lenses to date.
Thanks, Canon!
P.S. Now fix my stupid 28-135!!! :)
29 of 29 found the following review helpful:
Excellent lens - Sharp pics, great value. Highly recommended! Mar 08, 2008
By Jim Marte
"fivesix"
I bought this lens to replace the kit lens that came with my Rebel XTi and I am thoroughly impressed by its performance. The kit lens simply pales in comparison. The image stabilizer does its job very well, and the image quality is excellent.
There are many people and reviewers who compare this lens unfavorably with Canon's acclaimed L-Series lenses. I think those folks are way too picky - one can't expect a $200 lens to perform as well as a $1,000 lens. That's like comparing a little Honda Civic to perform as well as BMW M3. Not gonna happen, but for the price the Civic is an excellent little car. Likewise, this lens is a worthwhile investment towards getting excellent pictures. Pay no heed to the people who rate this lens poorly because it doesn't zoom as far (you should have bought a longer lens) or those who claim its build quality is not as solid (you should have spent a lot more money).
I've read the tech reviews containing information about vignetting, barrel distortion, bokeh, etc. The reality is, I am not a professional photographer (i.e., I don't put food on my family's table by taking pictures) so those things don't matter so much. All I care about is that the pictures come out crisp and the colors accurate. I take pics of my wife and baby, often in low light conditions without a flash. I shoot in JPEG high compression to save disk space and to make it easier to email the photos to our parents and extended family. If this is what you'll be doing, then buy this lens right away; you won't be disappointed.
Perhaps someday I will want to buy a camera with a longer zoom (which is why I got a DSLR camera) or I'll buy a faster computer so I can switch to shooting in RAW (thus necessitating an L series lens). Until then, I expect this lens will be on my XTi for a long, long time.
25 of 25 found the following review helpful:
A Good Kit Lens Jan 07, 2010
By Jeremiah Edwards
There are a number of good reviews already for this lens, but I would like to write this review from the perspective of someone who got this lens as part of a camera kit. Last year I bought the Canon EOS Rebel T1i which came with this lens in the package. I have also read a couple photography books (David Busch's T1i Guide and Bryan Peterson's Understanding Exposure, both which I highly recommend), and I have done a lot of research on lenses.
The main two rivals of this lens are:
1) Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
2) Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
Both of those lenses are considerably more expensive than this one. The obvious advantage of the 18-200mm is range. If you don't ever want to switch lenses, you could probably buy this one and leave it on your camera. The 18-55mm IS and the 18-200mm IS have similar properties in terms of image quality, and they come with similar features. Basically, the 18-200mm is more convenient at a higher price, but you should expect similar performance.
The 17-55mm, however, is simply a better lens with better glass and near L performance at the price of an L lens. The 17-55mm has USM, which focuses faster, quieter, and more accurately, and the lens doesn't spin around when focusing. The 17-55mm has full-time manual focusing (you don't have to switch the AF off in order to adjust the focus manually), and it has a focal distance scale. These are very useful features for taking storytelling photos and other times when you need to set the focus manually. The 17-55mm is faster, having a constant f/2.8, and is much better at taking portraits and other type of photos that isolate the subject. Also, the 17-55mm has better IS. More than one reviewer of the 17-55mm has said, "throw out your kit lens, and buy the 17-55mm."
Well, I didn't throw out my kit lens (the 18-55mm IS), but I did think about selling it on eBay and buying the 17-55mm. Why, then, did I keep this lens? Well, the 18-55mm IS has three advantages over the 17-55mm, 1) it's much cheaper, 2) it's much lighter, making it more pleasant to carry around, 3) it came with my camera, so I had it already. Really, the 18-55 IS is not a bad lens. It can take some excellent pictures. In many situations it can take pictures that are just as good as those taken with the 17-55mm. Just keep in mind that you will never be able to get much bokeh with this lens, and it doesn't have USM. This lens is very sharp and doesn't have many image/color distortion problems. My main gripe with it is the auto focus, which is slow and sometimes jumps around trying to find the focus.
Just to let you know, instead of replacing this lens with the 17-55mm, I took that money and instead bought two less expensive but very good lenses:
1) EF-S 10-22mm USM (really the only lens to buy if you want to take any wide angle shots)
2) EF 50mm f/1.4 USM (a great portrait and indoor lens, which, in my opinion, can actually take better portrait photos than the 17-55mm; you might also consider the 50mm f/1.8)
I like my 18-55mm IS lens, and I think that I will never buy the 17-55mm. The next time I have $1000 to spend on a lens, I will probably buy the 100mm f/2.8L IS USM 1:1 macro lens. One last reason not to replace your kit 18-55mm IS lens with the 17-55mm is that if you ever replace your crop dSLR with a full frame dSLR, you won't be able to use your $1000 lens on it. If I spend that much on a lens, I would rather buy an L lens, which will last a lifetime.
The EF-S 18-55mm IS is not the best lens, but it is an excellent lens for the money. DON'T THROW AWAY YOUR KIT LENS! Keep it, and compliment it with other focal length lenses. I suggest:
1) EF 50mm f/1.8
2) EF-S 10-22mm USM
3) a telephoto zoom
4) EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM 1:1 macro
***UPDATE 12/21/2010***
First, I'd like to say that my kit lens (EF-S 18-55mm IS) is still working well and taking great photos. Very lightweight. Very good. No problems or complaints. Further, everyone should check out the tests and comparisons of DxO Labs. They compare different sensors, and different lenses on different cameras. This website provides invaluable information. Well, based on their tests on the T1i, the 17-55mm f/2.8 only slightly outperforms the 18-55mm IS. Given that small difference, is it worth all that money? Why not save up cash for L lenses that you can use on the full frame camera we all want to buy in the future?
Second, I can no longer recommend the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM. The USM motor in mine started having some problems, and now the autofocus is often slightly off. If you are shooting at f/# less than 2, that means your shots will definitely be soft. Not good. Go with the EF 50mm f/1.8 instead. DxO labs actually ranks that lens as having better optics than either the f/1/4 or the f/1.2L! Save yourself some money and buy the EF 50mm f/1.8.
My EF-S 10-22mm and EF-S 55-250mm are still performing well. I am selling my 50mm f/1.4 to buy the 50mm 1.8 and a lensbaby composer. Happy shooting :)
See all 153 customer reviews on Amazon.com
| |
| |
| |  | |  |
|
Recently Viewed | You may also like ... |
