For the opportunity EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III lens overview Many thanks to Vitaliy Kukota.
Canon EF 75-300mm f / 4.0-5.6 III
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III is a kit lens, that is, the lens that comes with the camera.
TTX Canon Zoom LENS EF-S 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6 III
Focal length: 18-55 mm
Maximum Aperture: F / 3,5-f / 5,6
Minimum Aperture: F / 22-f / 38
Number of aperture blades: 6
Optical design: 11 elements in 9 groups
Minimum Focus Distance: 25sm
Front Filter Diameter: 58 mm
The weight: 200g
There are a huge number of modifications of the lenses of the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 series, in modifications the devil himself will break his leg.
The simplest versions (without IS, USM, STM):
- Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6September 2004, Scheme 11/9 [1 ASP]
- Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6 II, March 2005, Scheme 11/9 [1 ASP]
- Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6 III, March 2011, Scheme 11/9 [1 ASP]
Versions with USM-motor:
- Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6 USMSeptember 2004, Scheme 11/9 [1 ASP]
- Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6 II USMMarch 2005, Scheme 11/9 [1 ASP]
Versions with Image Stabilizer IS:
- Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6 ISSeptember 2007 Scheme 11/9 [1 ASP]
- Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6 IS II, March 2011, Scheme 11/9 [1 ASP]
Versions with STM-motor and image stabilizer IS:
- Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6 IS STM, April 2013, Scheme 13/11 [1 ASP]
- Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 18-55mm 1: 4-5.6 IS STM, February 2017, Scheme 12/10 [1 ASP + SSC]
Versions for mirrorless cameras with bayonet mount Ef-m:
- Canon Zoom Lens EF-M 15-45mm 1:3.5-6.3 IS STM, October 2015, scheme 10/9 [3 ASP]
- Canon Zoom Lens EF-M 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6 IS STMSeptember 2012, Scheme 13/11 [3 ASP]
Version for mirrorless cameras with bayonet mount R (RF-S):
- Canon Lens RF-S 18-45mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM, May 2022, scheme 7/7 [2 ASP]
The main parameters of all Canon 18-55 for SLR cameras. increase.
Many modifications are most likely due to the fact that the first lenses produced very poor image quality, which actually earned notoriety. But over time, the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 line has become quite usable. You can see more Review of the second version of the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 II.
Sample photo on a Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III
This review presents just the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III without image stabilizer, one of the simplest versions. Despite the fact that my Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III is one of the cheapest lenses, it can produce quite normal image quality.
Sample photo on a Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III
The lens has a very short name Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III
- Canon - indicates that the lens is designed for Canon cameras
- EF-S - EF-S mount type, this lens can only be attached to Canon APS-C cameras that support EF-S mount lenses
- 18-55mm is the focal length of the lens. When used with Canon APS-C 1.6x cropped cameras, EGF will fit 29-88mm.
- f / 3.5-5.6 III - indicates the f-number values. Roughly speaking, this shows the value of the lens aperture.
Sample photo on a Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III lens has only one switch on its body, which is responsible for switching between focus modes. In AF mode, only auto focus is available, which works with all Canon APS-C cameras. In M mode, only manual focus is available. With manual focus, the lens focus ring rotates approximately 90 degrees. Focusing manually is very inconvenient, since the focus ring is very narrow, and when focusing it moves back and forth. The focusing method is the most primitive, due to the fact that the front lens rotates and moves back and forth, it will be problematic to use specialized filters. I recommend using at least protective filter for this lens, since the protective filter does not care if the front lens rotates or does not rotate.
Sample photo on a Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III
Auto focus speed is average. I did not feel any lack of focusing speed, all the more, at the short end (18mm) the lens is almost always focused in the area of infinity. Of course, this simple Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III cannot compete with the focusing speed with advanced lenses of the type Canon EF-S 17-55mm f / 2.8 IS USM.
Sample photo on a Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III
The Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III is not a fast lens. This means that it is very difficult for them to shoot in low-light conditions. Moreover, the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III does not have an image stabilizer. The aperture value f / 3.5-5.6 is quite normal.
Photo by Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III. Sun glare.
The focal length of the lens is very good for basic tasks, the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III has a wide angle, which is very important, and a 3x zoom allows you to quickly compose the desired frame. A good feature of the lens is the ability to shoot at very close range. You can even shoot good macro.
Sample photo on a Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III
Image quality
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III at open apertures gives a sharp image in the center of the frame, sharpness drops at the edges and corners. Good sharpness appears around F / 8.0 throughout the field. The lens suffers from strong 18mm distortion and strong vignetting. Chromatic aberrations also present in sufficient quantities. The lens weakly catches hares and showed itself well in the backlight. Due to the fact that this is a standard dark zoom, it cannot boast of good bokeh.
HA lens
Sample Photos on Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III
All photos in the review were shot on camera. Canon 550D, photo without processing. RAW -> JPEG, Q80%, downsized to 2MP and printed from EXIFIn EXIF missing the 'III' at the end of the lens name.
Personal experience
Writing a review of the simplest whale lens is quite an interesting thing. On the one hand, it turns out that this is one of the most primitive lenses, and on the other hand, you can always squeeze a good shot even on it. If you buy a camera just for use at home, in order to take it to the sea, parties and take pictures of relatives, then the whale lens will normally cope with the tasks. Of course, Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 IS with a stabilizer it will be much better, but even the simplest Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III is a very useful lens. It must be remembered that important how to take pictures, and not by any means. All in all, the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III has many drawbacks, but there are also strengths. The whale lens has always been an unusually controversial lens.
Example photo on a Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III. Bokeh lens.
Prices for the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III lens in popular stores can look at this link.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
Conclusions:
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III is one of the simplest lenses, boasting small size and light weight.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
It's very cool that you started actively writing about the Kenons, there is a small typo “Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 at open apertures give sharp” * Gives *
PS Is it true that Kenon whales are worse than Nikon?
Whale lenses are very different.
It is 18-55 and the old one that you had on the review and Nikonovsky 18-55 without a stub
Almost the same.
From and confirmation of words “It is not important what the photograph is important, it is important that the photograph is important” (: Garniy viyshov looking around the object (:
And also the lens perfectly copes with backlight.
Well, this is probably only its only advantage. It's not just simple. It's elementary. Very dark, rather blurry, noisy. Vacuum cleaner. Once I rejected the entire photo session due to dust on the pre-diaphragm element. Although during the shooting, nothing was visible. I had to disassemble and clean. There is nothing complicated in this. Everything is elementary inside. There are no adjustment settings inside. The only thing is that the eccentrics for parallel alignment of the moving tube are located under the zoom rubber. I don't know about the others, my front ring on the MF is loose as if the thread is loose. On AF, the motor jams and is not so noticeable. Lately I have been trying not to shoot them. I use manual 50mm Vivitar and Helios 44-2. Unless you need to shoot wideangle and if there is enough distance. For beginners, of course it will do, but after a while an understanding of its properties comes and you want something better.
The cheapest solution if you need a wide angle. Just for the sake of this and hold))))
Arkady, always with great pleasure read your reviews, especially on Soviet optics. However, recently, in my opinion, the quality of reviews has begun to shift to the amount that kmk is not buzzing :). In the sense, earlier reviews came out less often, but were of better quality, now - as from a cornucopia, but their quality leaves much to be desired - there have been many unverified and incorrect statements and purely subjective judgments, and almost no actual information, i.e. reviews cease to be informative as before, but turn into pure photo fiction. In general, in order to contribute to the turning point of this trend :), I decided to write this review.
I will give just a couple of examples that are simply striking.
In the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III review, you write:
"There are a huge number of modifications to the lenses of the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 series, in versions the devil himself will break his leg."
In fact, there were only five modifications - the first three were without a stabilizer and the fourth and fifth were with a stabilizer. In my opinion this is not a huge variety and the devil shouldn’t break anything here :)
In short, the first two versions without a stub (Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 and Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 II) were almost the same (the difference was only in a slightly shortened lens length - the first version is a couple of millimeters longer than the second, everything else is completely the same).
The third version (III without stub yet) is very different from the second one - the external design of the lens has been completely redesigned, the optical scheme has been modified and slightly modified. The third version in appearance is one-on-one similar to the fourth (which went with the stub already), the difference between the third and the fourth is only in the absence of a second switch (on / off stabilizer).
The fourth version (IS with a stub) is actually the third, but with the stabilizer screwed on. As I already wrote the third and fourth in appearance of the twin (the difference is only in the presence of a stub switch).
The fifth version (or more correctly IS II) - also with a stub. Canon writes in releases that this is a modified and optically improved fourth version. Externally, the case of the fifth version is slightly different from the fourth (slightly changed the design of the case). I didn’t notice the optical difference between the fourth and fifth, so in my opinion the information in the releases about the improvement of the optical scheme is Canon’s commercial bluff. What struck me was the general simplification and cheapening of manufacturing the fifth version compared to the fourth. T.O. in my opinion, the fifth version is rather a slightly simplified and cheaper version of the fourth, and the design has changed slightly. In principle, this quite fits into the general tendency to simplify and reduce the cost of production, in connection with the general cheapening of the cost of new photographic equipment. By the way, in this regard, an example of comparing the native shoulder straps from the Canon 1000D and the Canon 1100D is very indicative. The first has a belt with embroidered letters, the second has letters painted on the belt. This analogy seems to be fully applicable to whale lenses.
The Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III review contains a photo with the proud Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III caption from Radozhiva. At the same time, the photograph shows a Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 II lens, i.e. lens of the second version ?? :( The third version, as I already wrote, looks completely different, and optically it is not the same as the second one. In this regard, it becomes completely unclear what kind of lens you reviewed in the review about Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III, the third version or still the second ??
Your replicas like “Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III are one of the oldest and cheapest lenses” are all about nothing, because if you are talking about the second, then everything is correct (old, soapy, cheap), but the third is noticeably better and by the way more expensive (in terms of picture quality it’s almost like a fourth, and the fourth is very good and at a price twice as expensive as the second).
Well, your phrase from the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 II review, where you write: “In this review, there’s a minimum of information because Radozhiva already has a review of the Canon EF-S 18 version "-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III, which is a copy of the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 II lens."
Well, the third version is not a copy of the second, these are different lenses. The second version is a copy of the first (almost 1 in 1), and the third is, if one can put it this way, a copy of the fourth (more precisely, the fourth is a copy of the third but with the stub bolted).
Please consider this post exclusively as constructive criticism, as I would very much like, as before, going to your website to read useful and informative reviews (although they do not come out very often), and not the daily photographic fiction, it’s not clear what was written :)
The problem is that at first version III meant the description of the very first version, and only after a couple of days, it turned out that I was given the opportunity to play with version III for half an hour. About the pun - re-read your comment and pay attention to the number of copies of the copy :) Review finalized. Thank you so much for your attentiveness.
Judging by the text of the review, I got a 100% impression that you did not even see the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III, because he has very little in common with the second :)
By the way, I just looked, the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III is actually not the third, fourth (if you take chronologically) version.
Those. Canon EF-S 2007-18mm f / 55-3.5 IS was released first in 5.6 (i.e. the third in a row), and Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III was released already in 2011 ( i.e. the fourth in a row) and was a Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 IS with a “cut off” stub. So he's not old at all, but very young :)
PS: site visitors, including myself, do not have the gift of reading thoughts at a distance, so we don’t see what was meant there and as it turned out, but the result, as you correctly noted, is confusion, alas, this is obvious.
Therefore, in fact, he wrote such a lengthy post so that there would be less confusion, and more really useful information.
The review, with your help, has been updated to the normal version. Please note that just in the modifications there is a real kind of confusion, especially about the chronological release and about real modifications.
I am glad that I could be useful, I believe that the review in its original form, to put it mildly, did not honor your site, because This lens is very well known, and therefore any mistakes in its description are especially striking :)
As for the confusion in the modifications, I completely agree - it takes place, although some logic in the names of the models (if we imagine what is what) can still be traced.
By the way, I completely forgot about the USM modifications of this lens, I sprinkle ashes on my head. But in my defense, I can only say that I wrote about the whale versions 18-55, and the USM modifications were never whale - even Canon's semi-professional XXD line as a whale managed to equip with a galimous EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 II :) Besides, 18-55 USM modifications are an extremely rare beast :) (at least since 2007, when I bought the first digital mirror, I have never seen a USM modification of this lens). In general, I don't understand why Canon tried to stick a not cheap USM motor into the 100% budgetary and optically lame lens EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 and EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 II :)
Okay, I'm glad the review has been brought to its logical conclusion. Once again, I express my gratitude for your attentiveness. I'll explain a little why there are so many reviews lately: they give me a camera or lens for less than a day, it doesn't depend on me whether to write or not write. Gave the technique - you need to quickly test. And taking into account the huge workload of the wedding season, the head does not cook :(.
As one of the classics used to say - Less is more!
What’s better and you won’t say it :) But it’s just IMHO of course and, let’s say, my wish :)
I hope that in winter I will have more time for Radozhiva. Do not forget about helping the project, and then 10.000 views per day and not a single like.
Good day!
Thanks for the review and additions from Andrew.
The question is, Lamer
Sellers strongly recommend instead of whale
EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 IS II take EF-S 15-85 mm f / 3.5-5.6 IS USM
Moreover, the recommendation costs several times (x4) more expensive
The explanation is that they say whale is junk, and 15-85 is THING!
I would be very grateful for the comment of a specialist
16-85 did not use, I can not say. But for starters, 18-55 is enough.
Thank you!
I also thought something like this, I was just trying to understand the logic of the price:
$ 200 - EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 IS II
$ 900 - EF-S 15-85 mm f / 3.5-5.6 IS USM
Suppose, why the EF-S 17-55 f / 2.8 IS USM lens costs $ 1100,
can, good aperture
The EF-S 17-55 f / 2.8 IS USM is a great lens - https://radojuva.com.ua/2011/11/obzor-canon-ef-s-17-55mm-f2-8-is-usm/
Hello Arkady! I need a lens for Canon 40d - like a regular station wagon. Shooting - full-length portraits, close-up portraits and groups. L- expensive. I would like quality for a reasonable price. Please advise.
Can Tamron find normal: https://radojuva.com.ua/2012/04/tamron-af-28-75mm-f2-8-nikon/
Fully meets my requests and for the price ... Thank you!
can I ask? what is the difference between the EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III lens and the EF-S 18-55 mm f / 3.5 - 5.6 IS II
The second lens differs from the first by the presence of a stabilizer.
Arkady, good afternoon! Tell me as a beginner, is it better to take with a stabilizer or not worth overpaying
As a beginner, better with a stabilizer. IMHO.
hmm ... a useful review, however, since I am the owner of this lens ....
Thanks so much for the reviews. Helped save money and gain your mind!
Wow, a lot of work has been done! and this lens is suitable for such a body http://canon.technoportal.ua/photos/canon-eos-700d.html
Please tell me which hood is suitable for this lens (Canon EF-S 18-55 mm f / 3.5-5.6 III), namely which does not twist but snaps into place. Thanks.
Hello, I had this lens with my 1200D camera. I’m blogging about how I shoot video in statics (talking head format) in a poorly lit room (although I already ordered light) I would like to ask which lens you can take instead of the whale lens to make it brighter , a little less noisy and so not very expensive
If noiseless, then pay attention to the lenses of the STM series. In your case, this is either 18-55 is stm or the more expensive version 18-135 is stm, but it is preferable because of its versatility
Good day. Please help me choose between EF-S 18-55 IS II and
EF-S 18-55 DC III.
I have been using this lens since the purchase in August 2013. I don’t want to overpay for the stabilizer, a FSHU-5 tripod, a Hoya HMC UV (O) 58mm filter, a little processing in the FSh, and the pictures are excellent. Moreover, at least, the landscape, macro, will be rubbed, although there is a fifty dollars for portraits, but if I take it off, it is more convenient for the cetaceans to focus, it’s a matter of habit. In general, in order to get high-quality images, you do not need to buy an expensive lens, it is easier to turn your head on to help your hands, and everything will work out. T
Or a portrait of a model, who will find a lack of image quality here?
Please tell me if the canon ew-60c lens hood is suitable for this lens? Or need some other?
The store tested Canon 2000D with this lens, the photos are sharp, blurring is worse than that of the Nikon D3400 with VR whale lens, but it is better in sharpness. Photos are obtained comparable to the Fujifilm XQ1.