Canon EF-S 18-55mm F / 3.5-5.6 IS II review

For the opportunity Zoom Lens EF-S 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6 IS II Review Many thanks to Yakovlev Vitaly.

Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6 IS II review

Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6 IS II review

This lens model is very slightly different from the earlier model Canon Zoom LENS EF-S 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6 IS. Optically, most likely, this is the same lens. Here is the visual difference:

The difference between IS, IS II

The difference between IS, IS II

In general, Canon has quite a few 18-55 3.5-5.6 class lenses. After I made the tablet, I was very surprised that the optical design of the lenses is almost the same.

Canon EF-S 18-55 Lenses

Canon EF-S 18-55 Lenses

The Canon EF-S 18-55mm F / 3.5-5.6 IS II is a simple, cheap lens that comes with Canon DSLR cameras. The set of delivery of the camera together with the lens is called 'kit', and this lens is most often called 'kit'. The lens from this review came with the camera Canon EOS 650D, as the lens owner told me, the difference between the Canon body and the Canon kit 18-55 was about 30 cu, so he decided to take the kit in order to immediately check the camera.

Canon EF-S 18-55mm F / 3.5-5.6 IS II only suitable for APS-C cropped cameras with Canon EF-S mount. EGF lens is 29-88mmThis range is very convenient for most simple shots. The lens can not boast of anything special except the image stabilizer. The stabilizer allows you to compensate for the weak aperture lens when shooting handheld. The stabilizer works pretty well. I have not noticed a significant improvement in stabilization over the first version of the 'IS I' lens.

Lens view with lens hood

View of the Canon 18-55 IS II lens with lens hood

When focusing, the front lens rotates and moves forward. When zooming, the trunk of the lens walks in waves, then retracts inward, then moves forward. There are two switches on the lens: a focus mode switch and a stabilizer operation switch.

The lens mount is plastic, as is the lens body itself. In fact, I like whale lenses in some ways, they are very light, cheap, they are easy to take with you anywhere, you don’t need to worry that something can happen to the lens. I often recommend the whale lens as a basis from which to start taking pictures, and sometimes you can do just this Canon EF-S 18-55mm F / 3.5-5.6 IS II. It is important how to take pictures, but not by what means. Due to the fact that IS II is very similar to the version IS I, I did not write a detailed review of this lens.

The simplest versions (without IS, USM, STM):

Versions with USM-motor:

Versions with Image Stabilizer IS:

Versions with STM-motor and image stabilizer IS:

Versions for mirrorless cameras with bayonet mount Ef-m:

Version for mirrorless cameras with bayonet mount R (RF-S):

The main parameters of all Canon 18-55 for SLR cameras

The main parameters of all Canon 18-55 for SLR cameras. increase.

Sample photos:

All photos without processing. Reduced size and imprinted data from EXIF. Everything is shot with the stabilization system turned on. The copy from this review was not the sharpest.

More examples with RAW sources can be found in the overview. Canon 100D (true for review 100D used another, not the most successful instance of the lens).

Lens prices in popular stores can look at this link, or in the price block below:

Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.


Canon EF-S 18-55mm F / 3.5-5.6 IS II - not a bad lens for the money, great to start with, has a convenient 3x zoom focal length range and an Image Stabilizer to help with handheld photography.

Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram

Add a comment:



Comments: 75, on the topic: Review of the Canon EF-S 18-55mm F / 3.5-5.6 IS II

  • Vyacheslav

    I took thousands of shots with this lens, the canon 1100d is quite satisfied, the sharpness is mostly good, autofocus is rarely missed, manual focusing is really inconvenient, the range of focus rotation is small and there is no distance scale, it’s a very convenient range of focal lengths, I shot with manual lenses with fixed focus, right away you can see how much more comfortable it is and their sharpness is definitely better than that of helios and industrial-61 hp, although earlier on industrial Zenith I had the sharpest lens. Here are a lot of pictures he shot

    • a guest

      Good shots, for this he is intended. Therefore, do not rush to throw glass on a dusty shelf without understanding the essence of the glass, and others have nothing to blame on the mirror if the face is crooked. Manual optics of a generally different purpose, the nature of bokeh and so on, would not compare them. Both give excellent results if hands grow from the right place.

    • Denis

      I have a Nikon D5100, and I bought a Canon 1100D for my brother for his birthday. I was surprised that JPEG with Canon in comparison with Nikon (in both cases 18-55) looks like it was shot with a soapbox - I don't know exactly what the difference is, but as if the lights were knocked out. visible when viewed 100%. already began to think that the lens is defective. I tried to process his CR2 files in lightroom - the result is much better, it is already clear that this is a DSLR, not a soap dish. can, of course, noise reduction in JPEG works, and it is also clear that JPEG is lighter than CR2, it adds when processing exposure

      • Oleg

        JPEG has the ability to be adjusted by the camera settings, by default everything is in such a neutral position

  • Roman

    Підкажіть be weasel I’m vibrating my Nikon 5100 or Canon 600d. I’m a little, I’ll give a little less noise in the picture without a hitch

  • anonym

    But what is KIT in general?

  • Alexey

    I have had such a whale since 600d.
    I am wondering how can I check the operation of the stabilizer? I experimented with long exposures, of the order of 1/15, so with on, that with off. stabilization is about the same result - lubrication ...

  • Yuriy75

    This lens is designed for everyday simple tasks, it copes with this excellently. But when you need more outstanding characteristics, then everyone decides for himself what he needs. Landscapes with him do not go out badly

    • Yuriy75

      And here's another

  • anonym

    Small distortion by 18 mm, on the vaunted 18-135 STM distortion is so large that it spoils the entire survey on the FR from 18 to 30 mm. If in the PHOTO mode you can still reduce distortion somehow, then the video turns out horror. Took a Canon 18-135 stm. Now I'm a little sorry. Anyway, I take 18-55 on a trip, and leave 18-135 at home.

    • Dima

      With STM, according to everyone’s reviews, for some reason the distortion is greater by shu.

  • Alexey

    Hello. Tell me, please, how to check the stabilizer of this lens?

    • Michael

      Just like any other - shooting at long exposures and comparing with a frame at a short exposure

  • Ren TV

    Thanks to the author for many articles, but it pisses me off individual readers who are all wrong - do not shit in kamements my blonde decided to buy an expensive device thanks to the site - bought 1200d and HAPPY human thanks for the articles and dispersion of hirersia, leave it for the pros

  • Alexey

    Hello. Please help me choose between EF-S 18-55 IS II and
    EF-S 18-55 DC III. Thank you very much in advance.

  • Andrei

    Many people hate this lens, but for which they themselves do not understand))) My conclusion on it is the following ... I have not only had any lenses on the job, the whale is an excellent lens, there are several claims to it, it is a spinning trunk (extremely inconvenient), it need a hood !!!!!!!!! moreover, for each focal length it has its own length, if at 18-24 it is somehow possible without it, at 55 without it it is not at all like, you can fiddle with the contrast, the length is 4 centimeters. Further, chromatic on wide, perceptible, are edited in the native editor. And last but not least, it feels dark, read correctly, it has nothing to do with the aperture, but the zooms are all dark and 2.8 too. I will not describe the pros, its main plus is that when you want to change it, you will be surprised but not so much !!! Fix? Which one then? 50? is it useless, shirik? why is he? better quality you will not get, fix 24 or 28 but the point? what is the increase? They are not far off in quality. Portrait? so the price for 85 is what and I doubt that you will only shoot portraits. Zoom with the best image quality only from a full frame of a whale, but alas and ah, where is a wide angle, but no. It turns out that whatever one may say, it has no competitors and it's not about the price but about versatility. I don’t want to hear a zoom option with a constant 2.8 sales, for such a sum there is such a meager increase in quality that you can forget about it

    • Andrei

      I will supplement it. The paradox of crop is that what you don’t fasten on it will be better only slightly, it doesn’t have very other characteristics. Want the right ones !!! take a full frame photo and there I will tell you everything is not so safe. Therefore, the conclusion is, just take interesting photos, take family photos, etc., study photos and you will understand that it does not matter what, but what matters !!!! Whale for the eyes for all the basic tasks of the average perverted person who takes a photo for the sake of the photo, and not for the sake of viewing pixels)))) under 100x magnification

      • Sanya Beard

        It’s so easy to take pictures without sprinkling photos on a smartphone and everything will be buzzing. The mirror is for this purpose necessary so that there is permission and you can consider the smallest details

      • Past the crocodile

        Andrew, well done!
        Of all the Gognokrop bootstraps, the whales worthy of attention are this series 2 and above.
        There is really nothing to change it for.
        Compared with the first 18-55, optically noticeably tightened plus a stub for honest 3 stops.
        It is worth a penny.
        Even using portrait metal at the far end with a 58mm hood, the metal from the takumar is higher than expected.
        The price is minimal.
        Changing to 2.8 really does not make sense.
        Paired with 50 1.8 and a long tree of 4.0, the ranges from 28 to 300 conditionally overlap.
        There is simply no alternative for a crop on a boot.
        And yes - cover the hole)
        5.6-8.0 - this is where his picture begins.

    • Misha

      So you can argue you can shoot on a tin can and everything will be OK, and the whale lens only for beginners is suitable no more and the quality is nothing from it

    • Sanya Beard

      Fixes are not far in quality from soap whale soap ??? yes you have something with perception is not so visible)))

  • AndreySD

    I agree with the last comment. I tried a lot of lenses and came up with a set: 18-55 IS II, 55-250 IS, Helios 44M and Jupiter 37A. The latter is for an amateur (it will show all the flaws of the face).

  • Serg

    Canon EF-S 18-55mm F / 3.5-5.6 IS II cheap lens, after the purchase requires alignment.
    The test results were very mediocre-soapy shots, worse than with the canon G7.

    I gave it under warranty on alignment with the camera, a couple of days later I got an excellent sharp lens.

    You can not compare with the old film, in the landscape, the sharpness and microcontrast are very good.

  • Serg

    Canon EF-S 18-55mm F / 3.5-5.6 IS II cheap lens, after the purchase requires alignment.
    The test results were very mediocre-soapy shots, worse than with the canon G7.

    I gave it under warranty on alignment with the camera, a couple of days later I got an excellent sharp lens.

    You can’t compare with old film ones; in the landscape sharpness and microcontrast are very good

    The stabilizer fulfills 2 stops

  • CHIM

    Recently I bought a Canon EF-S 18-55mm F / 3.5-5.6 IS II for a cheap price - at the beginning it turned out to be horribly soapy, but I was lucky that I had a Canon 50, which has manual adjustment. After alignment, I compared the result in sharpness with Helios 44-2, Jupiter 37A, Tamron 28-200 - Canon EF-S 18-55mm or higher or the same, even with an open hole. Of the minuses - there is practically no background blur, everything else is just a plus. I tried macro photography - it's gorgeous, even without macro rings you can get a good result.

    • Sanya Beard

      This plastic has neither good color reproduction nor a resolution. Sharpness is one thing and resolution is different, for example, look at an image from a whale of shit without a crop and it seems like nothing but you do 100% crop on the monitor and you can see that there is no resolution. Almost any fix is ​​better than this g…. and even Gelik 44-2 is not the best

      • CHIM

        Or I was lucky and got a successful copy, but of all the photos taken during this summer season, about 70% were made with this lens. True, I am more interested in shooting nature, it is practically not suitable for portraiture, artistic composition, but it is not inferior in color rendering to Helius 44-2, World-1, Industrial 50 either. I am not rich, and I do not have expensive fixes, so compare to Unfortunately, I can’t. He even won the test for backlit shooting, Helius has some hares, Canon has a quite acceptable photo. Although this is again on the Canon 50. I conducted a test with the old Canon 20, a completely different result: soapiness (although I won’t say that it’s big), and the colors are not like that (if you have a lot of trouble).

        • Michael

          It is likely lucky. Of course, he is unlikely to yield to the Soviet buckets. But with more expensive brothers, the difference will be obvious on covered holes. I have never made friends with this, although I am also shooting nature.

          • Valery

            Well, yes, of course, the tool paints the professional, and not the professional paints the technique (just about the dancer and the eggs).

      • Valery

        Listen, why are you all running around with this Helius 44-2, well, after all, this lens has no pictures, no colors, no resolution, no empty lens. You try Helios-44M-7 or Zenitar-M 1,7/50. And the lens from this article works perfectly, and if you don’t shake your body (and not from a binge), the picture draws decently and washes the background with a bang (here the main distance to the object, the farther the less blur - well, these are the basics for any lens), but if you choose a background, then you can spin it, of course, not a zinetar and a kaleinar, and if you wish, it conveys the volume quite well. By the way, I use all these lenses on the Canon 20 and Canon 50, and I often put the lens from this article on the Canon 20.

        • Rodion

          Do you seriously want to say that 44m-7 will give a fundamentally different experience compared to 44-2? Tin.

  • Noble

    Hello. I recently purchased an e lens 50 1-1.8. I like the picture. I am not a professional and I have a question. The 18-55 is whale lens is no longer needed or may it still be needed for some tasks?

    • Marat

      I use 50 only in the apartment, I can do without a flash. 18-55 - for the street.
      In defense of the whale: I tried Granit-11 and Soligor 70-210 - they didn't like it (it's inconvenient and the picture is not very good), but I liked Jupiter-37A.

  • Dima

    It was this version that was the most successful in my opinion, I shot with him for 6 years, it was surprisingly sharp even at 3.5, at 5.6 the sharpness was uniform across the entire field. He gave me a lot of cool shots, but the certificate remained as new and completely working. Photos from it are sold even on stocks.

Add a comment

Copyright © Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2023

English-version of this article

Versión en español de este artículo