File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
don't know how many of you know about this, but photozone just released a test of the new 18-55 Image Stabilized canon lens.

Holy shit.

This thing is AMAZING (at least as far as the pixel peeping goes)

It LITERALLY beats the pants off of virtually ANYTHING THAT ISN"T AN L LENS. And even then, there are quite a few L lenses that don't measure up.

Anways, check out the link.

I know I've finally found my cheap wide angle lens!

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_1855_3556is/index.htm

(haha, the 50 1.8 has to try harder now to be the biggest bang for the buck...)
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePENTAX CorporationCamera ModelPENTAX K10DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsSensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern650Focal Length (35mm Equiv)82 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2007:11:24 00:57:56Exposure Time0.3 secF-Numberf/16.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/16.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length55.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width600Image Height523RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeMacro
>> BlackAdder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
Glad to hear someone is happy with their new purchase. Get snapping and report back.
>> Anonymous
>>94079

I haven't puchased it.

I'm just currently shopping around for good wide to normal angle lenses.

Also, even if I didn't own a canon body this lens is pushing some pretty incredible numbers.

I can honestly say there is no other zoom out there that has these sort of stats going for it under five hundred dollars, (not even including IS)
>> BlackAdder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>94082

A good kit lens was well overdue. Now all we need is for Canon to confirm that this zoom will replace the old one rather than being kept back as an upgrade.
>> Anonymous
>>94090

Pretty sure their hand will be forced on that matter.

Once nikon puts their new kit VR lens into play (which won't be too long from what they said) canon is sure to step up and do the same.

They'll probably hold out until they have to though.
>> BlackAdder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>94091

They probably will hold back. Canon have to be one of the meanest makers out there.

The backlash and doubts are already creeping in on the forums, it seems. http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=411353

Including doubts about the reviewer's competency. This impending release is probably generating more excitement and controversy than the last L lens releases put together.
>> Anonymous
>>94093

another website had the same findings though.

also, can you fault them for doubting the reviewer?

He pretty much said that a kit lens from canon is one of the best lenses released in years (and not only just because of the price to performance ratio).
>> BlackAdder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>94094

I greatly enjoy this sort of internet rage going on. dpreview also has quite a debate. A lot of people get very defensive over the idea of a cheap consumer lens approaching the quality of their high end gear.
>> Anonymous
>>94095

I'm just going to throw in that I hate the forums on dpreview.

Anyone asking for a good lens is told to get the most expensive one and people laugh at those that use cheap bodies and lenses.
>> BlackAdder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>94096

I've seen that happen a lot both there and elsewhere, sadly. It annoys the hell out of me too. If you go on those places without pro gear then you are labelled a 'soccer mom' and you'll never be taken seriously by the snobs. The one I linked to is just as bad at times by the look of it.

Some amongst them try to defend the value of the cheaper equipment, but it gets drowned out in snobbery.

It's why I tend to lurk here. Even with the odd bit of trolling it's a generally good crowd. There might be a million "what camera" threads, but people have a better sense of humour and are more willing to suggest realistic ideas to questions and problems.
>> Anonymous
Don't forget this lens still doesn't have a very large range, isn't very light sensitive (although the IS will surely help in some situations) and has heavy distortions and vignetting... it's not the holy grail, but this would be damn sweet as a kit lens!
>> Anonymous
>>94100

I can see people even with more expensive lenses wanting it as a back up or a light alternative to walk around with. The old 18-55 was not bad value for money, but with the improvements it's even more worth while.

I wonder if IS will be like the new autofocus in that it will gradually appear in all the new lenses over time?
>> Anonymous
>>94100

avoid words like "heavy".

it definitely has those things, but none of them are game killers, and for the most part can either be ignored or fixed in post processing.

Also the 4.5-5.6 range is probably what makes it have such superior optical quality. This coupled with the four stop IS is a pretty potent combination.
>> Anonymous
>>94103

with canon and nikon? Definately.

Since they've chosen not to include the IS in the camera bodies they really don't have any other choice.

Not too long from now people will expect to always have IS, and canon and nikon will suffer unless they deliver.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
*troll engaged*

you know the sony kit lense beats the pants off all of the other kit lenses.
>> Anonymous
>>94113

*chuckle* oh you, soo crazy.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>94113

by the way, here's the MTF data for the SONY KIT LENS.

it's decent anyways.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>94113

and here's the MTF data for the *NEW* Canon 18-55 IS lens.

yeah, tasty right?
>> BlackAdder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
Begin the stats fight!
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
I've been pretty much using the 18-55IS as my primary lens since Tuesday. Here's a shot of my grandmother that I took at breakfast this morning. Her wrinkles are kind of like a resolution test chart. :)

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiLens Size18.00 - 55.00 mmFirmware VersionFirmware 1.0.5Owner NameunknownSerial Number0420104373Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:11:24 10:17:54Exposure Time1/30 secF-Numberf/4.5Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/4.5Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length30.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3888Image Height2592RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardExposure ModeAv-PriorityFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeSharpnessUnknownSaturationNormalContrastNormalShooting ModeManualImage SizeLargeFocus ModeOne-ShotDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeOffCompression SettingFineMacro ModeNormalSubject Distance0.580 mWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed224Camera Actuations-264568720Color Matrix129
>> Anonymous
>>94121
fuck, lol.
>> BlackAdder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>94121

I hope you didn't mention that wrinkle-resolution chart idea to her.

The shot came out well there. Any PP other than resizing?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>94123
Nope. Straight out of the camera. Aperture priority (probably), auto WB, default picture style.
>> Macheath !8b4g0BkNZg
>>94121
Man, this could have made a good fgsfds if only you got her to stick her finger in the air...
>> Anonymous
>>94125

Nice! It's the little lens that could.
>> Anonymous
>>94121
Tell her right eye to look at the fucking camera next time.
>> Anonymous
>>94169

wow, what a vapid comment.
>> Anonymous
Hmm, tests are showing the 18-55mm being just as sharp as the 900$ 17-55mm.

I was going to get the 17-55 for low light work but I'm having second thoughts after seeing the results of the 18-55mm with IS.

18-55mm + 580 Speedlite is half the price of the 17-55 and gives me the flexibility of a flash.

;_; what do I do?
>> Anonymous
>>94178

wait for more reviews and tests to come out.

Personally I need to save money where I can.

Are you professional or a hobbyist? Do you need the money?

Do you need to compensate for something?

all of these things will need to be considered.
>> Anonymous
>>94179

Photography is just a hobby for me but I have 1,000$ to blow. But just like you, I want to save where I can.

I shoot indoors and in low light the majority of the time.

I've considered the Sigma and Tamron alternatives to the Canon 17-55 but either one is still about 500$. At that price, I'd rather have a flash.
>> Anonymous
>>94183

I'm going to go for the 18-55 IS from canon, (if user ratings and more tests confirm what's been said so far).

Paying so little for such a big return? I mean, how can you pass that up?

Also, it looks like canon has locked onto the magical lens formula or something, because quite a few of their recent lenses have had stellar optical quality, so maybe in another five years you can upgrade from the 18-55 IS to something truly mindblowing.
>> Anonymous
Heh, I wonder who will buy their 17-85 IS now when the 18-55 IS beats the shit out of it for half the price.
>> Anonymous
>>94187

less than half. the 18-55 IS is 179.95 and the 17-85 IS is 515.00.

(from B&H photo anyways.)
>> Anonymous
wtf why do lens prices fluctuate so much at different online sites

200 there 500 there 1000 there WTFFFFF
>> Anonymous
>>94190

I find that between B&H photo and amazon you get pretty damn good prices.

Amazon actually has some fantastic prices most of the time.
>> Anonymous
>>94190
A rule of thumb concerning sites that sell photo gear:
- If it's 50% more expensive than B&H, then either it's an European store or it just sucks.
- If it's 50% cheaper than B&H, then it's a scam.
>> Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m
anyone have any clue when we can see Nikons new VR kit lens? I've held off on buying a D40 for it, and if I don't get it soon i'm gonna blow my money on stupid shit like a guitar or another gun.
>> Anonymous
>>94198
why do you care about lenses if you can play guitar?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>94198
Why do you need to pay for lenses when you have a gun?
>> Anonymous
bump for awesome lens!
>> Anonymous
Anyone here got one yet?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
>>94557
I've got it.

Handheld, 76mm equivalent, 1/13th exposure time.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiLens Size18.00 - 55.00 mmFirmware VersionFirmware 1.0.5Owner NameunknownSerial Number0420104373Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:11:25 20:58:01Exposure Time1/13 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/5.6Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length47.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3888Image Height2592RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardExposure ModeAv-PriorityFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeSharpnessUnknownSaturationNormalContrastNormalShooting ModeManualImage SizeLargeFocus ModeOne-ShotDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeOffCompression SettingFineMacro ModeNormalSubject Distance0.580 mWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed224Camera Actuations-264306624Color Matrix129
>> BlackAdder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>94626

Nice. You can see the benefit of the IS in that shot. There's no way that'd be coming out clear hand held normally.