A big hello! First, I want to get rid of that from me now a thoroughbred landscape photographer has grown, accordingly please any peculiarities to be considered in terms of equipment: for example, I need virtually no fast lenses in terms of light intensity. 99% of my pictures are taken with a tripod. The Canon 18-55mm IS II lens has been some time in the market and reviews there also sufficiently, I will give to my two cents anyway. : D I bought the lens as Kitlinse to my tried and true EOS 1100D and am very happy with it. When I started about three years ago with the photography, I-what lay involvement with photography and the associated theory concerns-a veritable vertical take out. I devoured one book after another, throwing huge sums out of photo magazines that put me in retrospect quite negative surprise, hehe. Well, of course I met during my research for a very short time on the mysterious red ring and the mysterious high price of most lenses of this kind I imagined a long time the question. How much better a lens is really, whose price is about 10-15fache is my Kitlinse? In the case of my Canon 18-55mm, the answer came relatively abruptly. I could borrow from a friend whose 16-35mm L and screws on my camera, the result was consistently disappointing ... for my friend! I made comparison pictures outdoors on the tripod at each identical settings (about: f5.6, 35mm, ISO 100) with the two lenses and could not detect any difference in sharpness and image quality, thus the issue was L eaten for me and I take pictures today even with the Kitlinse. Of course, and this issue is and was constantly diskutiert- f2.8 and better processing quality are the outstanding features of this special L lens compared to Kitlinse, and this is probably true in most L lenses. In addition, the Shard is fully compatible format. But in the course of the exercise of the profession or hobbies "Photography" you should ask yourself the following questions and answer them for themselves, otherwise disturbing developments in the bank account or savings book could in fact become apparent: 1. Am I a photographer or Technikenthusiast? Do not misunderstand, both answers are absolutely legitimate. Depending on which answer is correct for oneself, the following thoughts can do this: Assuming you choose to answer B, you can throw any further considerations overboard and buy the 2,000 Euro L Shard easy because at techies the rationale is naturally from (I speak from personal experience may: D) each thing is bought, not necessarily in order to do well for the sake of the thing something that corresponds to the functionality of the thing. (Dig at full-time test shot photographer and lab rats ... and me;)) There is a tendency, however, to come back to 1st to answer option A, you can continue the process of spiritual self-realization perk: you see yourself as a photographer and it seems as if the camera and the lenses for about more than necessary equipment and not as worthy of protection Babies to look at the glass case, so you should ask yourself whether the respective desired lens for 2,000 euros, the requirements that one to yourself and the photo results is fulfilled, or if this is not the case. To that effect, could be crucial as in the case of our example, the maximum aperture of f2.8. So far I have not needed f2.8, which is probably due to my photographic interests. Accordingly, to date showed a 16-35mm 2.8 no sense to me. Eventually I tried to convince myself, I would need a 16-35er for a backpacking trip to Iceland because the Kitlinse would probably not get through the weather conditions (which were ultimately really hard, cold rain etc.) and the L glass is sealed and rugged lot. Ultimately, however, I took the 18-55er and the EOS 1100D with (which, incidentally noticed is unsealed, therefore would have the 16-35er availed nothing on the camera in heavy rain) and two utensils survived without damage (we had 12 of 14 days of rain and even dropped the camera even in a traveling glacial stream ..). Besides, I was in the course of trekking trips glad that I saved myself a little weight with the lighter lens konnte..na yes, no matter! An important question I have: 2. Am I an amateur photographer or a professional? (In this case, I mean by "professional" not only people who make good photos and make money, but also people who make bad pictures, and thus still make money) Do you want to pursue as a hobby photographer her passion, I refer again to question no. 1 and the accompanying text. Sometimes you want take off really as a professional, you need to appear (as can I play only what I tell professional photographers) different approach to equipment Q. Since in the course of recent years has increasingly opened the profession of photographer and more and more people in this division pushing or more people with their DSLRs can shoot just as good photos as a hobby photographer, as is the case with the paid professional, not only the image results of professionally working photographers have to be good, and their equipment must make an impression: there may be make then paid the L glass against the kitsch legacy (meaning: why should I get a pro with the same mini camera money if Uncle Hans can do just as good pictures with the same camera ?!). But Moreover I do not want further dahinschwafeln, from "pro-His" I am millennia away. Here, then, the highly subjective opinion of a photographer who likes to write amazon-de Reviews to sort his thoughts ... I hope I could help ... and entertain!
