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

Hi guy, im back to Canon with my latest purchase, the Canon 100D.

I bought the camera with the standard cheap 18-55mm non-IS lens (which i sold straight the way). i currently have just the one lens which is the Canon 50mm 1.8.

I now need a lens to cover the wider gap, and i really cant make my mind up between the two lenses mentioned in the title. The 18-55mm STM is £70 brand new on ebay, and the 24mm 2.8 STM Pancake is £112 brand new.

Which would suite for a general walk around wider lens? Image quality wise, not too fussed about the whole size and weight, and general usability wise.

The £42 gap isnt a big deal for me so price isnt a concern on the one!

Any help or examples of difference would be fantastic!

bboysmax wrote in post #17514624
Hi guy, im back to Canon with my latest purchase, the Canon 100D.

I bought the camera with the standard cheap 18-55mm non-IS lens (which i sold straight the way). i currently have just the one lens which is the Canon 50mm 1.8.

I now need a lens to cover the wider gap, and i really cant make my mind up between the two lenses mentioned in the title. The 18-55mm STM is £70 brand new on ebay, and the 24mm 2.8 STM Pancake is £112 brand new.

Which would suite for a general walk around wider lens? Image quality wise, not too fussed about the whole size and weight, and general usability wise.

The £42 gap isnt a big deal for me so price isnt a concern on the one!

Any help or examples of difference would be fantastic!

How do you like your M 18-55mm compared to your M 22mm? That should give you some clues...

bboysmax wrote in post #17514624
Hi guy, im back to Canon with my latest purchase, the Canon 100D.

I bought the camera with the standard cheap 18-55mm non-IS lens (which i sold straight the way). i currently have just the one lens which is the Canon 50mm 1.8.

I now need a lens to cover the wider gap, and i really cant make my mind up between the two lenses mentioned in the title. The 18-55mm STM is £70 brand new on ebay, and the 24mm 2.8 STM Pancake is £112 brand new.

Which would suite for a general walk around wider lens? Image quality wise, not too fussed about the whole size and weight, and general usability wise.

The £42 gap isnt a big deal for me so price isnt a concern on the one!

Any help or examples of difference would be fantastic!

Heya,

Well, do you want a normalish angle of view, or a "wide" angle of view? The 24 STM would give you a normalish view on APS-C. Kind of similar to what your eyes see in terms of the angle. If you want wider, the 18-55 makes sense, as 18 is actually on the wide side on APS-C. Gives you 18~49 as an option that you didn't have. You already have F1.8 on the 50 for speed, so having a 24mm with F2.8 doesn't make a ton of sense if you just need a wider angle. Unless you need wider angle AND max aperture (in which case, F2.8 is frankly the slower side of primes that are this short).

Very best,

Apolgies, I should change my signature! I no longer have the M, sold that a long time ago so I can't remember!

That's what i'm thinking. The 18-55 will give me abit more to play with and at 23mm it shoots at f3.5 so very similar. Plus the benefit of IS!

Makes me wonder apart from the size, what is the benefit of the 24mm?

bboysmax wrote in post #17514624
Hi guy, im back to Canon with my latest purchase, the Canon 100D.

I bought the camera with the standard cheap 18-55mm non-IS lens (which i sold straight the way). i currently have just the one lens which is the Canon 50mm 1.8.

I now need a lens to cover the wider gap, and i really cant make my mind up between the two lenses mentioned in the title. The 18-55mm STM is £70 brand new on ebay, and the 24mm 2.8 STM Pancake is £112 brand new.

Which would suite for a general walk around wider lens? Image quality wise, not too fussed about the whole size and weight, and general usability wise.

The £42 gap isnt a big deal for me so price isnt a concern on the one!

Any help or examples of difference would be fantastic!

18-55 STM will ofcourse give you more flexibility, while the 24 STM is ofcourse faster.
I went from 18-135 STM to 24 STM which is a huge gap, why? Because I think it's more fun with primes and zooming with your feet

bboysmax wrote in post #17515125
That's what i'm thinking. The 18-55 will give me abit more to play with and at 23mm it shoots at f3.5 so very similar. Plus the benefit of IS!

Makes me wonder apart from the size, what is the benefit of the 24mm?

Better macro capabilities. the 24STM goes as close as 0.16. I think the 18-55 is 0.25

24 STM

Excellent shot.

What was the settings for this? f2.8?

Would you say the 24mm is sharper wide open?

bboysmax wrote in post #17515125
what is the benefit of the 24mm?

Heya,

Sharper wide open.
Wider maximum aperture. *
Closer minimum focus distance. *
Smaller physical size (if you care about this at all).

* These two properties combined can result in more out of focus area generation due to thin depth of field if you prefer that, but again, you have the 50 F1.8 which already does this and does it better.

I wanted to like the 24 STM, but really, I just couldn't, not on an SLR. It wasn't fast enough to be what I wanted it to be (F2.8 is a slow prime in this focal range, especially in APS-C).

I like the idea of it being small and sharp and on the wider side, but it's really just for people who truly want pancake size. It's not for people who are into fast, sharp primes.

In your case, again, you have a fast telephoto already, but you like wider angles that you're saying you need, so an 18-55 just makes more sense for you in your situation.

Very best,

That's what I was thinking, i already have the 50 for thin depth of field and low light shooting, the 18-55 with IS will be good for most other things, just needs stopping down for sharpness.

I had the 18-55mm IS STM for less than 5 hours before I sold it. It had great images and the AF was quick but it was such a boring lens.

The IS I didn't notice improve anything. I could hand hold a video just as steady without the IS than I could with it.

I'd go with the 24mm pancake. You already have the 50 and 18mm is not wide enough to worth the small lack of speed and extra bulk.


Personal preference though, I shoot mainly live shows and street stuff.

Hermelin wrote in post #17515132
Better macro capabilities. the 24STM goes as close as 0.16. I think the 18-55 is 0.25.

The 18-55 STM actually has better Macro capabilities because you can use it at 55mm which ends up being .33x vs the 24mm STM at .27 magnification.

Is the 50mm 1.8 similar to the 18-55 at 55mm? Roughly .33x?

No, the 50mm 1.8 II only has .15x max magnification.

instead , get the 18-135 STM. check $$$ on e-bay, I purchased 2 of them. one for the wife, I liked it sooo much, I then purchased one for myself. she also has the 55-250 STM. I haven't tried that yet, if I like it I will purchase one for myself. I am not going to fight her for a lens. she has the use of all my "L" glass also.