New Kit Lens and 55-200 released! With IS!!

northernlight wrote in post #3759314
it will be interesting to see if the IQ is on pair with the sigma 17-70 or somethin.

Would be nice, but it looks like the kit lens still retains the same optical qualities of the original.

Its also pretty clear that these lenses are aimed quite squarely at the casual shooters who really aren't interested taking anything more than a snap shot, but like to do so with a nicer camera, which is the vast majority of camera purchasers.

the EF-S55-250 IS is just like my Nikon AF-S55-200IF-ED VR.

it's got an UD and IF design so should be good , I think I will get one for my rebel XTI if it is priced around 300USD.

looks like Canon is finally realizing it is losing the market share to Nikon and starts listening to Canon users voices more seriously.

I think it is good.

Screw the EF-S crap. I'd love to see IS on my 24-70L.

Moppie wrote in post #3759336
Would be nice, but it looks like the kit lens still retains the same optical qualities of the original.

this is not true
the new lens has improved optics (see MTF charts on Canon Japan page),
better close up performance (different MFD) and better bokeh.
new kit lens for high resolution dSLRs
(the original 18-55 was designed for a 6mp imager (300d, the original rebel)) and it looks way underdesigned for 10mp cameras).

Moppie wrote in post #3759336
these lenses are aimed quite squarely at the casual shooters who really aren't interested taking anything more than a snap shot,

nope, these lenses are made to compete with Nikon

All Canon nonL zooms (except 70-300 IS) are very bad...
Nikon consumer zooms are very good/sharp.
These lenses are Canon's response to Nikon highly praised kit lenses 18-55, 55-200 and 55-200 VR.

Not everyone can or wants to invest in 70-200 f/4 L IS or 17-40 f/4 L

I think I'm gonna get both these lenses since I'm a prime shooter and don't want to invest in overpriced 17-40 f/4 and 70-200 f/4 IS.

ed rader wrote in post #3758976
what canon is doing with these "new" IS lenses is sending a loud and clear message not to expect in-body IS in its DSLRs.
with other companies marketing cameras with in-body IS canon needed to come up with cheaper IS lenses.
now you decide if that's a good or bad thing !
ed rader

That's exactly why I primarily like it. Besides, it's pretty cool to have more options when you're DSLR shopping.

Forget these lenses, Canon needs to jump on board with a nice 18-200 with IS. Why is it that Nikon and Sigma each have one and Canon cannot? I think it would be a much bigger seller and much more appealing to the consumer end of the market. Wake up Canon!

TigerMike wrote in post #3760383
Forget these lenses, Canon needs to jump on board with a nice 18-200 with IS. Why is it that Nikon and Sigma each have one and Canon cannot? I think it would be a much bigger seller and much more appealing to the consumer end of the market. Wake up Canon!

canon is giving you the 18-55 IS and 50-250mm IS instead. a two lens kit with IS and more range for half the price of the nikon.

ed rader

Why is everybody jumping on these lenses? They were designed to be cheap. Cheap is not bad. No value for money is bad. And the kit lens, although designed a long time ago for a 6Mpixel body - as stated by tom_s - is not bad value for money.

If these lenses are better optically than the existing variants and stabilized, at comparable costs, then they appear to be a very good value for money.

L Lenses are nice and all that, but there are people who want to get a descent phtography kit for next to nothing. And these people are bigger numbers than the L glass addicts (like us all here), so their needs must be addressed.

Nah.
Already have my lenses thank you very much.

SaSi wrote in post #3760454
Why is everybody jumping on these lenses? They were designed to be cheap. Cheap is not bad. No value for money is bad. And the kit lens, although designed a long time ago for a 6Mpixel body - as stated by tom_s - is not bad value for money.

If these lenses are better optically than the existing variants and stabilized, at comparable costs, then they appear to be a very good value for money.

L Lenses are nice and all that, but there are people who want to get a descent phtography kit for next to nothing. And these people are bigger numbers than the L glass addicts (like us all here), so their needs must be addressed.

canon is getting its assed kicked by nikon on the low end and this is its attempt to play catch up.

so much for that 50-150 f2.8 some of you have been looking for or a quality 18-200 IS.

sure these lenses are a good value for the money....if that's what you are looking for.

the only lenses that would interest me at this time are a stabilized 24-70L or 24-85L and maybe a $1500 400L f5.6 IS.

ed rader

Too bad not EF.

ed rader wrote in post #3760499
maybe a $1500 400L f5.6 IS.

ed rader

That would be really nice. Now that Canon has admitted their new IS system is worth about $100, you would expect prices of IS lenses to drop a bit that use the new IS build.

tom s wrote in post #3760047
All Canon nonL zooms (except 70-300 IS) are very bad...

the 17-55 and 10-22 aren't terrible....

Mike55 wrote in post #3760668
That would be really nice. Now that Canon has admitted their new IS system is worth about $100, you would expect prices of IS lenses to drop a bit that use the new IS build.

that's one possible interpretation but i wouldn't hold my breath .

ed rader