Much better than it looks - Bargain

Canon has indeed need a lot of criticism for the previous model of this lens, that was probably a real cheap Shard. That apparently was not without effect: The newer model is a real bargain. The feel is indeed plastic adhesive (especially when one compares it with a professional L lens), and manually, it can only operate fiddly - but usually is given to such a zoom yes in standard situations with active autofocus (AF) a. Although the is a clearly audible micromotor, but precise and fast enough. The image stabilization works very effectively.

But the blast is the really good look unless you can not accept the lack of light intensity. However, the relatively small maximum aperture has the consequence that unlike high-speed lenses may not work so well with a shallow depth of field, so an object can not really freely imagine picturesque blurred background. Who can do without these photographic expressiveness and intensity, but is very well served with the 18-55 mm. Another small drawback: The front lens rotates when focusing, patch Polarizer one must adjust so after focusing. And: Whoever has lenses with ultrasonic motor must think here in the rare case of the manual focus because the AF motor off beforehand, otherwise one kills him. But the lens is fairly immune to lateral light, so produced, unlike bright compared lenses with large aperture angles hardly spotty artifacts in the images. You can live quite well without lens hood so here.

Optical properties: I got my kit lens compared to my 900 euro expensive, high-intensity Canon EF-S 17-55mm / 2.8 / IS USM lens, image stabilization and a high-intensity fixed focal length as a reference in a measuring arrangement with Siemens star by tested on my EOS 50D. The result: In the sharpness it stops at wide-angle, medium and long focal length loose with the 17-55 mm. Even better: With a lot of light, it forms edges with high contrast (in practice, for example, building contours in the midday sun.) To the edges towards clean without color fringing (chromatic aberration, CA) from. The bright 17-55mm with its necessarily thicker lenses cuts here in comparison much worse (it just has this very different strengths). The consistently good test results in the relevant photo magazines so I can fully confirm.

Otherwise, the 18-55 mm has the typical characteristics of such a standard zoom: In wide angle it produces cushion-like image distortion, the tele-end lets the focus slightly (but not much). In practice, it tends to be cooler color reproduction compared to 17-55. Very pleasant I find the small dimensions and low weight. If it should be easy, I take it with together with the Tele-brother 55-250 mm and my 450D. Then the camera equipment is at a still good portable kilos, but brings secure better results than with a superzoom ("zoom"), which covers approximately this focal length range from wide angle to telephoto in one lens.

Conclusion: The value for money is worth full 5 stars!