Canon 18-55mm IS STM vs 24mm 2.8?

I would go with the 18-55 (well, I actually did), I also bought the 100D with the non IS kit lens, which was sold the day I bought it.

I bought the 18-55 STM and have found it to be the nicest 18-xx lens Canon have made, it's sharp, it's light, it's got super fast AF, completely silent for video. I have the 50mm f1.8 for low light and shallow focus, and have also added the 55-250IS and now the 10-18 STM.

It makes for a lightweight, good quality kit for all situations.

d123 wrote in post #17520246
I would go with the 18-55 (well, I actually did), I also bought the 100D with the non IS kit lens, which was sold the day I bought it.

I bought the 18-55 STM and have found it to be the nicest 18-xx lens Canon have made, it's sharp, it's light, it's got super fast AF, completely silent for video..

Yeah, my experience is the same. The cheap kit lens puts my expensive 17-55 and 15-85 lenses to shame. (Admittedly the latter appear to be bad copies.)

Archibald wrote in post #17520259
Yeah, my experience is the same. The cheap kit lens puts my expensive 17-55 and 15-85 lenses to shame. (Admittedly the latter appear to be bad copies.)

Don't feel bad-photozone.de shows in their tests that the 18-55mm STM kit lens IS better than the 17-55mm F 2.8 at common apertures! Yea, I know, I couldn't believe it either:

http://www.photozone.d​e …on_1855_3556stm​is?start=1 vs http://www.photozone.d​e …non_1755_28is_5​0d?start=1

I rented the 17-55mm F 2.8 last summer-I got some nice shots with it, but it certainly did not blow me away, and I decided not to buy it, I found the kit lens at KEH for a little over 100 bucks in January-and I am pleased with it. As to the lack of F 2.8 on the kit lens-I have several fast lenses for my 5DII when I need the speed.

anscochrome wrote in post #17520364
Don't feel bad-photozone.de shows in their tests that the 18-55mm STM kit lens IS better than the 17-55mm F 2.8 at common apertures! Yea, I know, I couldn't believe it either:

http://www.photozone.d​e …on_1855_3556stm​is?start=1 vs http://www.photozone.d​e …non_1755_28is_5​0d?start=1

I rented the 17-55mm F 2.8 last summer-I got some nice shots with it, but it certainly did not blow me away, and I decided not to buy it, I found the kit lens at KEH for a little over 100 bucks in January-and I am pleased with it. As to the lack of F 2.8 on the kit lens-I have several fast lenses for my 5DII when I need the speed.

This is what you could call the halo effect. When the 17-55mm came out ~10 years ago, it was such a sharp and versatile lens, great IQ, the first of its kind. It acquired a halo, and today we still sing its praises.

Meanwhile, new lenses appeared and kit lenses greatly improved. Now lowly kit lenses have comparable quality.

But in our minds some of us still carry the idea that lenses like the 17-55 and 15-85 are amazing and we hold kit lenses in contempt.

There's also the misconception that you "get what you pay for."

Hey, why spend $100 if you can spend $900?

All excellent replies, really helpful so thankyou!

I've gone with the 18-55 STM anyway, it should be here in a few hours. costing me only £70 new i couldn't resist...compared to double that for a used Tamron 17-50.

The money saved can go towards another lens. Maybe the 10-18mm!

bboysmax wrote in post #17520812
All excellent replies, really helpful so thankyou!

I've gone with the 18-55 STM anyway, it should be here in a few hours. costing me only £70 new i couldn't resist...compared to double that for a used Tamron 17-50.

The money saved can go towards another lens. Maybe the 10-18mm!

I've actually had the Tamron 17-50 as well (IS and non-IS versions) and the STM kit lens compares very well with them at the common apertures.

I'm hoping to get some use of my 10-18 later today (it only arrived yesterday), the sun is out and the sky is blue .

Pancake 24 F2.8.

d123 wrote in post #17520827
I've actually had the Tamron 17-50 as well (IS and non-IS versions) and the STM kit lens compares very well with them at the common apertures.

I'm hoping to get some use of my 10-18 later today (it only arrived yesterday), the sun is out and the sky is blue .

Let me know how the 10-18 goes today! Very tempted with that lens.

Ive now had it just over a week, but haven't had a great deal of time to use it.

My initial thoughts are good build quality and great size and weight. It's the first really wide lens I have used that isn't totally ungainly or heavy and can easily slip into a small bag with the camera. The lens is only slightly bigger than a 18-55 kit lens.

Here is one of the photos I have taken (this was yesterday evening on my way home).

d123 wrote in post #17537101
Ive now had it just over a week, but haven't had a great deal of time to use it.

My initial thoughts are good build quality and great size and weight. It's the first really wide lens I have used that isn't totally ungainly or heavy and can easily slip into a small bag with the camera. The lens is only slightly bigger than a 18-55 kit lens.

Here is one of the photos I have taken (this was yesterday evening on my way home).

Slightly higher resolution at:
https://farm8.staticfl​ickr.com …89137874_0ae6c7​0d71_k.jpg

This is an awesome shot!

Another 10-18 STM example.

sample picture it was taken at a flower garden

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

halleluya wrote in post #17592503
sample picture it was taken at a flower garden

Hosted photo: posted by halleluya in
./showthread.php?p=175​92503&i=i261893776
forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses

Everything looks smeared, soft and underexposed.

Hi, so can you told me where i was go wrong so next time i can get a better image, thanks.

halleluya wrote in post #17593532
Hi, so can you told me where i was go wrong so next time i can get a better image, thanks.

Over saturated in post.....