 "Ideal general purpose lens for Canon beginner DSLR camera" | 2009-11-15 |
| - Reviewed By User: ALYU98KL3VUGF |
Canon EF-S 18-135mm IS is an affordable all purpose lens designed especially for Canon beginner digital SLR camera users. The built quality are very similar to Canon Rebel XS, XSi and T1i body. It does not feel heavy and too long.
Focal length of 18-135mm (equivalent to 29-216mm) is very versatile. It is wide enough for indoor or long enough for outdoor.
There is no USM (ultra sonic motor) in the lens, so it will make a a bit of noise when the lens auto focus is activated. AF is moderately fast and very good for everyday use.
Image quality is very good relative to consumer grade lens, it is certainly not as good as expensive high grade Canon L lenses. Bokeh is round and quite pleasing.
Alternative lenses are
* Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Standard Zoom Lens for Canon DSLR Cameras which has longer reach but also more expensive and longer.
* Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras which is not wide, compatible to full frame Canon body and has USM. Built quality of this lens is better, but image quality is average.
Check out full size image samples at my website. Look for my web address by viewing my profile. Thanks for reading.
|
| |
 "Better Than Expected - but Still Economy Class" | 2009-11-11 |
| - Reviewed By User: APQY23KSBBCNO |
Switching from Pentax to Canon, I had to start with no Canon lenses. Therefore, I had to go with the 7D kit. I had wanted the EF 28-135 USM kit but after waiting months on a backorder situation, I went with the 18-135 kit from a local camera store. I knew that the 28-135 was a pretty good "kit lens" whose only consideration was that the 28mm aperture is very restricting for wide angle on a crop-sensor. I had read preliminary reviews of the 18-135 that didn't sound too encouraging (this is in contrast to working with pro-level glass from Pentax for some time). However, after a week of using this lens with the 7D, I found that it's not as bad as I expected. Pictures taken with it are reasonibly sharp, have reasonible contrast and fairly even image quality across the frame - when I follow these guidelines:
1. Avoid 18 - 24mm shots, even at stopped-down apertures due to overall reduced image quality; softness, especially away from center, distortion and fringing.
2. Don't shoot at wide-open aperture for any focal length if given the choice due to increased softness.
The lens is built reasonibly well for a kit lens. It does focus quickly without USM and is not too loud doing so. What I don't like is that there is no distance scale. I will often take candid shots, either with flash or without, where I first guess the distance to the subject and set that manually on the lens, and then take a surprise photo without any focus delays or focus-assist lighting from the flash to warn the subject that a picture is about to be taken. Can't do that with this lens.
While the 18-135 is generally a reasonible kit lens, it is not the right lens to do the capabilities of the advanced 7D justice, however. Don't know why Canon packaged this lens with the 7D (kinda of like "putting a Fiat motor in a Ferrari?"). Based on reviews and comparisons, I believe the 28-135, on the other hand, would be the better inexpensive choice for this camera. The funny thing is that the 18-135 kit costs $100 more than the 28-135. For that extra $100 I gain some usability between 24 and 28mm but lose some image quality overall. While the 18-135 is convenient to have for now, I look forward to the 17-40 and 70-200 f4L lenses as possible upgrades. I'll provide an update after more time using this lens in order to make sure I give it a fair chance to prove itself. |
| |
 "Better Than Expected on My XSi - Will Stay on Full Time" | 2009-11-05 |
| - Reviewed By User: A1UHPI86S6A7VG |
Purchased lens from someone that bought an EOS 7D and had good glass already. It was essentially new. Put it to the test when I got it, compared it directly to my existing 18-55IS under the exact same conditions. I'm hoping to post some 100% crops of handheld and Live View shots of the moon taken on 11/4/09. My takeaways for this lens after about 150 test shots:
- It has better corner sharpness than the 18-55 at all aperatures and all focal lengths
- It appears f8 is the sweet spot for this lens, at least on my copy.
- No issues with focusing even in low light.
- Easy to handle on XSI, should be well balanced on all cropped sensor Canons
- Will be my permanent on camera lens, if I need more zoom, will use my 55-250 for now.
- Colors and contrast are good and true across the zoom range. That's what we bought a Canon for to begin with.
- Vignetting characteristics essentially the same as the 18-55IS. Visible wide open, gone by f8.
- No downsides from my standpoint. I shoot as a hobby for enjoyment and this camera/lens combo just plain works for me, and most likely will work for 95% of you that have cropped sensor Canons.
For the money (~$450 or less), this is a no brainer. Buy this lens if you are looking to upgrade, have limited funds, and want more reach compared to the 18-55. If you have more available funds, don't need as much reach, but still want/need an upgrade, buy the new 15-85 ($800 MSRP) or the older 17-85 (~$500 on-line), or the 17-55 f2.8 (~$1000 on-line. You may want to sepnd some time exploring this site and the excellent reviews and information. [...]
Not having USM, not a big deal. Early ISO 12233 Crops don't look good, stop worrying - B. Stubblefield's hit it on the head in her review. I was just as concerned, and can tell you my concerns are unfounded. Close ups, tight zooms, distant shots with zoom, all turned out better than the 18-55 and 55-250 combination up to the 135mm level. I don't have expectations that this will be as good as a "L" series lens, but know how to get the most out of what I have. Image quality exceeds what I can get from my 18-55, so I'm pleased as punch with it. Could I get better image quality, sure, but at many more $$$'s that aren't justified for me.
I will be purchasing the Canon 70-300 USM lens shortly after Christmas to compliment my new 18-135, and then sell my existing 18-55IS and 55-250IS lenses. Needless to say, I am very happy with this lens. |
| |
| "An awesome affordable lens that creates crisp images" | 2009-11-02 |
| - Reviewed By User: A1J6ZGS6HQFW1X |
I used to own a Sony 12x digital zoom and recently stepped up to a Canon T1i. I liked my Sony because it was light weight, snapped great pictures and offered me the flexibility of an ultra zoom. So, I was hoping to get the same range with a lens for my Canon T1i as well. I travel a lot and like taking close-up as well as landscape pictures with my subjects in the foreground. So, I did not want to be seen as a geek who keeps changing camera lenses often and kills the joy of posing for a photograph. Based on several reviews I read about the kit lens, it didn't seem like the ideal one to buy and it did not have the ideal zoom length as well. So, I just bought the Canon T1i body and plunged into extensive research about the ideal lens that would offer the flexibility of a wide angle and an ultra zoom. The most recommended one seemed to be the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens. However, for a novice photographer, it seemed too much a price to pay. Then I stumbled upon this one and was quite skeptic that it had very few reviews. But, the review by Stubblefield gave me the confidence to try this one out as she seemed to have the same requirements as I did. It turns out that I made a really good decision in going for this lens.
I compared this with the kit lens(18-55mm) one of my friends owned and it is only slightly heavier albeit with a bigger diameter (67mm). But comparisons of shots taken with the 18-55mm and this one at ~30mm reveal how crisp and rich (with nice bokeh) the pictures are with the 18-135mm compared to the 18-55mm which created slightly softer pictures. At the telephoto end, the lens is pretty fast in focusing and there is no difference in image quality compared to the ones taken at 30mm zoom. I was at a concert recently and was having fun snapping close up shots of the performers at 135mm and was amazed at the low light performance of this lens. I was shooting at ISO 1600 but still the images were sharp, had hardly noticeable noise and had excellent details when cropped. Two thumbs up for the Image Stabilization! I am not sure if it was the Canon T1i or the lens that created those awesome pictures but the combination definitely works great. One of my friends shot those close-ups with his Canon 55-250mm IS lens and at 250mm he sure got close. But, the pictures came out shaky because we didn't have our tripods with us. Never mind though, when I cropped my shots taken at 135mm, I was able to get the exact pictures that he shot at 250mm without any shake or loss of image quality. So, I guess I wouldn't wish I had the 55-250mm.
There was some mention about this lens not having the USM. But I would not be concerned with this at all as it does not seem to be any more noisier than the kit lens or the Canon 55-250mm IS lens. Over all, I would highly recommend this lens for novice photographers at least as you wouldn't often find yourself wanting for a wider angle or more zoom (think crop). An excellent walk around lens at an excellent price that produces excellent images. The only other lens I would even consider buying is the Canon 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 to cover the ultra wide angle segment but that can come later though. If you are finding your feet with one of Canon XS/XSi/T1i, then please do yourself a favor and get this lens with the body. You will never find yourself searching for another lens in the near future.. |
| |
| "Perfect walk around lens" | 2009-10-30 |
| - Reviewed By tech_guy_oregon |
Like many people i was debating whether to go for this lens or the canon 18-200 IS, or the Tamron 18-270 VR on my Canon DSLR. Let me clarify on this point.
Firstly this lens is cheaper (at this time) than the other, almost 150$ difference at retail.
Secondly this lens weighs half at 1 lb than the canon 18-200 at 2 lbs. For canon 450d/xsi or 40/50D this is excellent, as the lens is not too heavy for the body. I have no problems of stability and walking around, and it makes better shots.
Third, there isn't much advantage of 200 over 135 at the telephoto end. you can crop the pictures and for 10/12 mpixels it really doesn't make much a difference.
Lastly, i decided to go with the Canon lens vs Tamron or Sigma (actually both the Tamron and Sigma are good lenses, the Tamron slightly better in some aspects, but it doesn't have a product in the 18-120 range with VR). The sigma 18-125 with OS is slightly heavier at 1.5 lbs.
I was skeptic of not having USM but it doesn't seem a deal breaker to me. Focussing is fast and accurate, and like other review has no zoom creep (yet). There is also no zoom lock button, so i hope there is no lens creep.
Now the picture quality. I found it sharp for most cases, not tack sharp like primes, but compared to kit 18-55 lens very good sharpness. The edges seem a bit soft in low light, but center sharpness is very good. Outdoors or in good light, sharpness throughout. Colors are vibrant and faithful, i wasn't dissapointed.
It is not a professional review, but if you just want an opinion i would highly recommend this lens as an excellent lightweight walkaround lens, ideal for most situations with enough zoom, and sharp enough to make great pictures.
|
| |
| "Great travel/ walk around lens." | 2009-10-17 |
| - Reviewed By nickie_claire |
I was more than a little apprehensive about purchasing this lens before many official reviews came out, but I'm really glad I did. I have an 18-55 kit, 70-300, 60mm f/2.8 Macro, and 50 prime (all great beginner lenses, BTW) but I needed something I could stick on my camera and forget about when going out around town. As a young lady that likes small purses, this is a constant internal struggle- hang my awesome camera around my neck like an "I'm on a project and shouldn't be hit on" necklace, or stuff it in a big camera bag with my other lenses in a "I don't have kids but I might as well cause this looks like a diaper bag" fashion. I deflect male advances either way. It's just a matter of how light I travel when I do it. And if I can leave some highly-stealable stuff at home, I will.
How does it feel?
This seems to have the same feel as my 70-300. Not a plastic-y light feeling like the 18-55, slightly rubber ridges and hefty, but not heavy, weight to it. I wouldn't use this lens to bludgeon enemies, but it doesn't feel as though it came out of a gum ball machine either.
What's the color like?
We compared this lens to the Canon EF 50mm f1.4 USM Standard & Medium Telephoto Lens for Canon SLR Cameras (took identical photos at same focal length, f-stop, settings, etc.) Both lenses were incredibly sharp at the sweet spots and still great at the edges (when taken at F8) but the colors of the 18-135 were much less washed out. We definitely had the white balance settings locked for both photos, but the 18-135 just showed reds, purples, blues, greens, all colors were more vibrant and true.
Now if you want your family photos to look like they came straight from a comic book with crazier-than-life color explosions, you'll have to look to post-processing for that. Weirdo. All I'm saying is that I won't have to change the color balance to cloudy to experience non-prison looking color in family portraits. Nothing kills the vibe of a party photo montage like grayish Alcatraz hues.
Yeah, but I can get this from an 17-85 or the new 15-85, right?
Good point, friend. But the extra focal length after 85mm is really worth it, especially when shooting things across a street or shooting semi-close wildlife. And if the 15-85 is way more expensive and the 17-85 is about the same price, why not go for the longer length? You could make the same argument for the 18-200, but I don't think that the compromised sharpness (and heavy 21 oz weight, vs the 16.1 oz of the 18-135) is worth the extra focal distance. Also, you get the latest version of the image stabilization system with this one.
But there is no USM, and the 17-85 has USM. I MUST HAVE USM ON ALL MY LENSES!
Calm down there, buddy. True, there is no USM on this lens. But having used both the 17-85 and 18-135, the latter is just as fast to autofocus. It may not have the USM, but you wouldn't notice a big difference. The motor is super fast and doesn't autofocus hunt like my 70-300 USM tends to do. You can hear the motor, but it's not as loud as the Canon 70-300 USM motor. Image stabilization is also great- there were plenty of pictures that have been saved with that feature, especially in low light/no flash situations.
Finally, I want to mention the "The Digital Picture" ISO 12233 Crops (google this; I can't provide a link). This test scared the crud out of me, and is making a lot of people spew hate about this lens. It makes this lens look soft compared to some other lenses. When I started shooting, I thought at first that there was a sharpness issue until I realized that my little brother had changed my ISO to 1600. Thanks, little bro! After that was fixed, everything was as sharp as I could hope for. Having done my own sharpness tests, I realized that the ISO 12233 crops weren't telling the whole story. I don't plan on sticking this sucker on a tripod and shooting tiny black and white lines with it all day (I have more interesting subjects, and they are in color!) I've taken hundreds of pictures with this lens and just don't see any image quality or sharpness difference when compared to my other lenses. So chill, people.
In conclusion, if you love the pictures your DSLR gives you, but hate the lens diaper-bag/bookbag look, this is a great choice. It's not going to make you into a magical Ansel Adams photo spouting machine, but no equipment will do that. This lens takes some pretty nice pictures when you stop worrying about 100% crops and start enjoying life. Shoot and be happy.
|
| |
Expedited Available
