EF-S 18-55 IS vs USM

For a lens of that focal length is there really that much improvement over a comparable focal length USM lens?

Improvement in what? The autofocus speed? I have a 17-85mm IS USM, and its autofocus is blazing fast. MUCH faster than the original 18-55 kit lens, not sure how it compares to the IS but I don't think they did anything with the micromotor when they added IS to the lens (although they did improve the optics)

One has image stabilization, one doesn't. I guess it depends if you find that useful, or not.

crn3371 wrote in post #8312738
One has image stabilization, one doesn't. I guess it depends if you find that useful, or not.

Well, he didn't specify WHICH USM lens he is talking about, so you can't say "One has image stabilization, one doesn't"

Plenty of USM lenses have IS, and lots of them don't. But the 18-55 IS does NOT have USM, so that's why I commented on the autofocus speed.

So OP - WHAT is your question exactly?

I assumed that the comparison was between the various versions of the kit lens. I do agree that the original question is kind of vague.

That would rule out the original kit lens, so I immediately thought of both the 17-85 and 17-55 f/2.8

egordon99 wrote in post #8312825
That would rule out the original kit lens, so I immediately thought of both the 17-85 and 17-55 f/2.8

There was an 18-55 USM kit lens, but AFAIK it was sold only in Japan. I've never seen one.

-js

Thanks for the responses people. I guess more to the point was is the IS worth the additional money over a USM lense without image stabilization for a short focal length lens. Not considering the speed. I am looking for a 18-55 lens and trying to determine if I really need the IS. Thanks ofr the replies.

eos650 wrote in post #8313272
Thanks for the responses people. I guess more to the point was is the IS worth the additional money over a USM lense without image stabilization for a short focal length lens. Not considering the speed. I am looking for a 18-55 lens and trying to determine if I really need the IS. Thanks ofr the replies.

The 18-55 IS is a much better lens than the earlier 18-55 lenses optically. Huge improvement, whether you care about IS or don't.

But most of the older 18-55s aren't USM.

-js

number six wrote in post #8313345
The 18-55 IS is a much better lens than the earlier 18-55 lenses optically. Huge improvement, whether you care about IS or don't.

But most of the older 18-55s aren't USM.

-js

Exactly.
If you want an 18-55, in my view the only reasonable option is the 18-55 IS. The justification is the optical performance; IS is a bonus, but for me, quite a big one.

cool, sounds like IS is the way to go. thanks for the replies.