Toni said:
you n00b/troll. Both Canon EF-S 18-55 STM and EF-M 18-55 are the very best kit standard zooms on the market today. I have used both extensively, especially the EF-M and it is absolutely excellent IQ. Only compromise is aperture.
Upvote
0
Canon EOS Rebel T7's are Next on the DSLR Schedule [CR2]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
you n00b/troll. Both Canon EF-S 18-55 STM and EF-M 18-55 are the very best kit standard zooms on the market today. I have used both extensively, especially the EF-M and it is absolutely excellent IQ. Only compromise is aperture.
Toni said:
you're kidding right?
I mean .. seriously .. you're not comparing a f2.0 smartphone lens with a 18mm to 55mm zoom on an APS-C sensor (of any form of fashion.. ) are you? really?
and if you can't get a good image out of the SL1 and the 18-55 STM the fault firmly resides in the photographer.
Upvote
0
I've used the SL1 (or 100D) with the 18-55 STM and thought it'd be a good light, inexpensive walkaround system. Well...
- Image quality -- The 18-55 is a starter lens and it's good enough for casual shots outdoors and in good light. Most starting up should be happy with the images when compared with cell phones in those conditions. It's still favorably different. But, outdoors on a cloudy day or in poor light, I found it practically useless. The pop-up flash helps sometimes but not always gets the results you want. Also, barrel distortion at the wide end is quite bad and color fringing is present in more photos than you'd like.
- Ergonomics -- The 18-55 STM is practically weightless. It's mostly plastic and the bulk distributes the weight all over so you hardly notice it's even in your bag. But, the bulkiness for what it does also is IMO a bad fit mounted on the SL1 form factor. Of course you can make it work but the 18-55 works out better on a bigger Rebel.
- Use -- Bottom line is it's a fair weather friend. It's a starter lens, Canon will want you to buy others. If you have other lenses, I'd carry it only if I want the lightest stabilized general zoom for handheld video in good light.
- Alternatives or complementary lenses -- Fortunately, the SL1 works great with some of Canon's cheapest and smallest primes. The SL1 is meant for the 24mm 2.8 STM pancake if what you really want is a general purpose and small, inexpensive system. The SL1 works great with the 50mm 1.8 STM, which is also a very good fit for this form factor. I'd have this on the SL1/100D most of the time as the pictures are more satisfying and also usable in more light conditions than the 18-55 STM, but with the obvious caveat that there'll be situations the 50 STM will be very restricting since it's an 80mm (with 2.8 DOF) full-frame equivalent. But, where you can have the space to work with, I've found the SL1/100D + 50 STM combo can be quite good, especially for people pictures or say sculptures or ceramics in a museum (do take care not to don't bump into anything backing up though LOL; no, seriously). Throw in the 24 STM pancake with the 50 STM and you're set for many types of photos with an inexpensive, small DSLR system. Throw in the 18-55 STM in the bag for when you expect to swap out lenses to do handheld video in good light.
- Image quality -- The 18-55 is a starter lens and it's good enough for casual shots outdoors and in good light. Most starting up should be happy with the images when compared with cell phones in those conditions. It's still favorably different. But, outdoors on a cloudy day or in poor light, I found it practically useless. The pop-up flash helps sometimes but not always gets the results you want. Also, barrel distortion at the wide end is quite bad and color fringing is present in more photos than you'd like.
- Ergonomics -- The 18-55 STM is practically weightless. It's mostly plastic and the bulk distributes the weight all over so you hardly notice it's even in your bag. But, the bulkiness for what it does also is IMO a bad fit mounted on the SL1 form factor. Of course you can make it work but the 18-55 works out better on a bigger Rebel.
- Use -- Bottom line is it's a fair weather friend. It's a starter lens, Canon will want you to buy others. If you have other lenses, I'd carry it only if I want the lightest stabilized general zoom for handheld video in good light.
- Alternatives or complementary lenses -- Fortunately, the SL1 works great with some of Canon's cheapest and smallest primes. The SL1 is meant for the 24mm 2.8 STM pancake if what you really want is a general purpose and small, inexpensive system. The SL1 works great with the 50mm 1.8 STM, which is also a very good fit for this form factor. I'd have this on the SL1/100D most of the time as the pictures are more satisfying and also usable in more light conditions than the 18-55 STM, but with the obvious caveat that there'll be situations the 50 STM will be very restricting since it's an 80mm (with 2.8 DOF) full-frame equivalent. But, where you can have the space to work with, I've found the SL1/100D + 50 STM combo can be quite good, especially for people pictures or say sculptures or ceramics in a museum (do take care not to don't bump into anything backing up though LOL; no, seriously). Throw in the 24 STM pancake with the 50 STM and you're set for many types of photos with an inexpensive, small DSLR system. Throw in the 18-55 STM in the bag for when you expect to swap out lenses to do handheld video in good light.
Upvote
0
When I was using an 1100D beside the 5D2 I could barely tell the difference in almost any shot (posted on forums).
Eventually I got rid of the 5D2. Size, weight and cost of replacement became much more important (taking a $1,000 camera on vacation is a big risk).
For social media purposes an APS-C body may as well be Medium Format. IQ out of the cheapest Canon EOS on the market is an order of magnitude better than any application that 99% of people will ever use.
Eventually I got rid of the 5D2. Size, weight and cost of replacement became much more important (taking a $1,000 camera on vacation is a big risk).
For social media purposes an APS-C body may as well be Medium Format. IQ out of the cheapest Canon EOS on the market is an order of magnitude better than any application that 99% of people will ever use.
Upvote
0
Mikehit said:
Useless might be too harsh a word but generally it's because I find the images not as sharp as I'd expect when I look at them on my computer. In similar conditions with the 50 STM, I'm happy with the results, so when I go out and it's a cloudy day or it's night, I suppose I personally find it "useless" in that situation because I find myself deciding to just leave the 18-55 and go with a prime. In good light, especially on a nice sunny day, they're close (but the prime still noticeably better for me) and I could choose to go with the convenience of the zoom. But again, small as it is, a bit bulky on the SL1.
The 50 STM is my default preference when using the SL1/100D but I'm always having to check my spacing, though worth it for me. You can always swap out the 24 STM for wider shots and I'd imagine for other SL1 users, the pancake is the default and the 50 the secondary. The 24/50 STM are definitely worthy complements or alternatives to the 18-55 STM. Perfect for this form factor and price range and quite easy to change. I still keep the 18-55 but it'd be for handheld video in good light.
Upvote
0
well nobody claims EF-S and EF-M 18-55 STM kit zooms to be the sharpest lenses in Canon's arsenal. Yes, decent prime lenses - anything from 40/2.8 and 50/1.8 STM upwards - are optically superior compared to kit zooms, even the best ones.
BUT! I have no trouble getting sharp images with either 18-55 STM in any type of weather. If there is too little light, shutter times might be too long for tack sharp images and/or ISO too high and reduced contrast + noise reduction take their toll. Or captured scene itself is very low contrast due to inclement weather / poor lighting ... but that's not the kit zooms' fault. The same effect will be noticed even with a Zeiss Otus.
BUT! I have no trouble getting sharp images with either 18-55 STM in any type of weather. If there is too little light, shutter times might be too long for tack sharp images and/or ISO too high and reduced contrast + noise reduction take their toll. Or captured scene itself is very low contrast due to inclement weather / poor lighting ... but that's not the kit zooms' fault. The same effect will be noticed even with a Zeiss Otus.
Upvote
0
benkam said:
color fringing and distortion is easily fixed in post processing. if you really want to bump up your image quality run it through DLO.
so it's hard to say that it's practically useless. unless you're doing something like comparing it to a fast prime.
Upvote
0
AvTvM said:well nobody claims EF-S and EF-M 18-55 STM kit zooms to be the sharpest lenses in Canon's arsenal. Yes, decent prime lenses - anything from 40/2.8 and 50/1.8 STM upwards - are optically superior compared to kit zooms, even the best ones.
BUT! I have no trouble getting sharp images with either 18-55 STM in any type of weather. If there is too little light, shutter times might be too long for tack sharp images and/or ISO too high and reduced contrast + noise reduction take their toll. Or captured scene itself is very low contrast due to inclement weather / poor lighting ... but that's not the kit zooms' fault. The same effect will be noticed even with a Zeiss Otus.
rrcphoto said:
You can't help but compare with what you can use. I look at the 24 2.8 and 50 1.8 primes, then the 18-55 kit zoom which will give 24 f4 and 50 5.6 max, look out and the sky's overcast (again) or it'll be dark soon. I'm not planning to shoot handheld video, I'm fine checking my spacing and swapping two small primes, so for my personal application, the 18-55's useless as I don't want to deal with its limitations. I leave it at home and just go with the 24/50 STM combo that I find so much superior for stills. And even on good days, I prefer the 24/50 STM and what's great is that these are inexpensive small lenses perfect for the SL1/100D in quality, size and price range. The 18-55 still finds use but mostly as a stabilized video zoom.
Upvote
0
Not to mention of course that the 18-55 (not even the SL1, for that matter) is actually aimed at you as a buyer. You may find use for it as a small, second compact body but you are not the primary market for it. I would say your personal views on what is acceptable is far, far higher than that expected by the target market.
So for someone who is the target market to read comments like 'practically useless' is not really helpful to them.
So for someone who is the target market to read comments like 'practically useless' is not really helpful to them.
Upvote
0
It is possible that those complaining about the 18-55mm STM kit lens have been unlucky to have poor copies. As has been noted, the reviews for the lens are generally VERY favorable. I have used the lens myself on my SL1 and it is a very sharp lens. Image quality is essentially indistinguishable from much higher priced lenses.
The main differences between the Rebels and higher priced APS-C cameras is NOT the IQ which is virtually identical, but in the other features and build quality.
The main differences between the Rebels and higher priced APS-C cameras is NOT the IQ which is virtually identical, but in the other features and build quality.
Upvote
0
look who's talking. absolutely clueless n00bs. why on earth dont they stick to their beloved smartphones and selfie sticks? a digital rebel plus 18-55 STM is really "throwing pearls before the swines", as we say in german. sorry, but it is really absurd to listen to those those incapable snapshooters trying to bash IQ of 18-55 STM.
Upvote
0
Mikehit said:
I’m not bashing the 18-55 STM, it's alright in some situations but just pointing out its limitations.
I don’t know if what I’ve said so far influences anybody’s purchase decisions here but if it does, allow me to be clear on what I think, based on my experience with the SL1 (100D):
1) If the SL1 with 18-55 STM kit zoom is all you can afford, be happy, IMO, it’s a good DSLR system and for its price range, it’s noticeably better than point-and-shoots and cell phone cameras. Consider later purchases of the 24 STM and 50 STM.
I got my 100D with the 18-55 STM priced only several euros more than the one with body only, because the latter wasn’t on sale. So it was a no brainer getting it with the 18-55.
2) But, as of today, if you can push your budget 100 $ or euros more, there are two ways you can go:
2a) If the SL1 body only is cheaper by $50 than with the 18-55, skip the one with the kit: get the body only and pair it with the EF-S 24mm 2.8 STM from the get-go. Yes, the SL1 and 24 pancake were made for each other, period. Then, if you like portrait-type photos or just need to have that extra bit of reach while still keeping the small prime theme, line up the good old 50mm 1.8 STM if you don’t already have it.
The SL1 is a budget DSLR and the 24 STM and 50 STM are two of Canon’s cheapest lenses and with those, if what you want is a compact, capable, affordable DSLR -- whether as a starter system or a second system -- you’re done. Enjoy taking your photos!
2b) Here’s another alternative to consider though: If you’re looking at this extra-$100/euro price range, think again if you really want the SL1 or could instead go for the T5i/700D body with 18-55 STM. It’s bigger but the smallness of the SL1 means a fixed screen and the T5i/700D’s tilt and swivel screen is useful, for selfies or self-monitoring video or simply getting a good angle on a shot. The bigger body also balances better with bigger lenses like the 18-135, which looks and feels ridiculous on the SL1. If you get a T5i/700D on a good price with the kit zoom, go for it, as you can always consider the primes later.
That's it.
Upvote
0
mileage varies by use and user. while it will work for some people, using 2 prime lenses with 24 and 50 mm focal length is not necessarily a better solution than a 18-55 zoom lens.
i do have a few prime lenses but find myself using the 18-55 STM quite often. to me, prime lenses are specialists, one-trick ponies, exactly the right solition for a specific task, when i know in advance what that task/situation is going to be. more often, for all not-preülanned photographic situations - e.g. "walkaround" in my city or other cities, or alpine ventures/mountaineering in summer or winter - i prefer the flexibility of a zoom. often, i cannot freely chose my vantage point. if i want/need to go small and light, i want a compact camera (like SL1 or in my case an even smaller EOS M) with one compact, light, optically decent, not too expensive universal standard zoom lens on it.
18-55 kit zooms had a poor reputation since earlier versions (pre STM) where optically mich weaker. Canon has corrected this in the current EF-S and EF-M 18-55 IS STM zooms. and nikon) 18-55 kit zooms. I find IQ astoundingly good for such small and cheap lenses. of course there are optical limits - first and foremost f/3.5-5.6 - but sharpness is no issue (unless it is a bad copy). calling current EF-S/M 18-55 STM IS zooms "useless" or "no sharp images in less than ideal weather/light" as someone did in an earlier post is totally undeserved and untrue bashing.
so my advice to (first time) Canon "Rebel" or EOS M buyers is: think about "what kind of images do you want to capture? in what types of situations? what scenes, what subjects? planned/unplanned shootings?". depending on answers, i'll recommend either 18-55 STM without hesitation and/or other prime or zoom lens/es.
i do have a few prime lenses but find myself using the 18-55 STM quite often. to me, prime lenses are specialists, one-trick ponies, exactly the right solition for a specific task, when i know in advance what that task/situation is going to be. more often, for all not-preülanned photographic situations - e.g. "walkaround" in my city or other cities, or alpine ventures/mountaineering in summer or winter - i prefer the flexibility of a zoom. often, i cannot freely chose my vantage point. if i want/need to go small and light, i want a compact camera (like SL1 or in my case an even smaller EOS M) with one compact, light, optically decent, not too expensive universal standard zoom lens on it.
18-55 kit zooms had a poor reputation since earlier versions (pre STM) where optically mich weaker. Canon has corrected this in the current EF-S and EF-M 18-55 IS STM zooms. and nikon) 18-55 kit zooms. I find IQ astoundingly good for such small and cheap lenses. of course there are optical limits - first and foremost f/3.5-5.6 - but sharpness is no issue (unless it is a bad copy). calling current EF-S/M 18-55 STM IS zooms "useless" or "no sharp images in less than ideal weather/light" as someone did in an earlier post is totally undeserved and untrue bashing.
so my advice to (first time) Canon "Rebel" or EOS M buyers is: think about "what kind of images do you want to capture? in what types of situations? what scenes, what subjects? planned/unplanned shootings?". depending on answers, i'll recommend either 18-55 STM without hesitation and/or other prime or zoom lens/es.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)
