Kit lens blues - Canon 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS STM

Alcor

Alcor

Messages
48
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
No
My first post, not sure whether it should be here or in "beginners". I am in retirement now returning to photography as a hobby after a long ...long break. I have been fortunate to have been gifted an EOS 700D which came with the 18-55 IS STM kit lens. After the initial enthusiasm in owning a camera that had more bells and whistles than I could imagine I eventually became a little frustrated at the mixed quality images I was getting. The main issues have been varying levels of softness and surprising amounts of chromatic abberation on contrasting edges, tree branches, leaves and the like. Regarding the latter I found and turned on the CA correction and it does help. However, having played around with it quite a lot I have come to the conclusion that either I'm maybe expecting too much from the lens, or its perhaps not a good example of it, or maybe they are all like this. I've seen this lens reviewed as "optically superb" and "super sharp at all settings", other reviews temper that a little but still rate it well. To my mind the lens is pretty decent in the 30-35mm range at f5.6-8 which makes it a prime type lens with a small window of application. Whilst I'm at it, having a grump, I don't much care for the electronic manual focus that has no feel to it whatsoever!

On a much better note I have recently acquired a Tokina 14-20mm f2 wide angle lens. By comparison a real "lump" of a lens. Really nice to use and very sharp. From reviews I've read, Tokina lenses generally seem to fall down on autofocus being variable and slow and having issues with CA. I have no complaints at all in this respect. There is in some instances very minor CA on bright edges but nothing that I have not been able to correct. I have also acquired a Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro di vc, and from my limited forays with it so far, I think we are going to have fun!

I have enough to keep me interested and busy and will at some point get something to fill the 20mm - 90mm gap (17-50/24-70/prime?) but thats for another day. I'm enjoying acquainting myself with the forum and thanks for reading.
 
I have that set up as well that I use very occasionally.
Although not the best Canon lens, it is quite good at around the f8 - f11 mark.
Its a lot better than the earlier kit lenses.

Enjoy your new addiction and most of all - have fun experimenting!!
Welcome aboard ;)
 
mstphoto said:
I have that set up as well that I use very occasionally.
Although not the best Canon lens, it is quite good at around the f8 - f11 mark.
Its a lot better than the earlier kit lenses.

Enjoy your new addiction and most of all - have fun experimenting!!
Welcome aboard ;)
Click to expand...
Many thanks for the welcome. At this point, (and probably here-on!) experimenting is very much the name of the game, with one or two satisfying shots thrown in.
 
I understand your frustration, I bought a Canon 100D that came with a kit 18-55mm and kit 70-300mm MKIII lenses and they both suffered from CA and being fairly soft, about 9 months later I bought a Canon 24-105mm f4L it's been the best piece of optics I've bought and it's rarely been off my camera in 4 years.
 
Welcome Ian.

I don't have DSLR's now (I've gone mirrorless) but when I did I was very impressed with the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8. It's a relatively compact and light lens but it was also the first lens that made me think it was too sharp for pictures of my then GF. Sharpness can be over rated but maybe it's better to have the ability to use it than not. There is also a similar Sigma 18-50mm f2.8. These may be worth looking at at some point.

The Canon equivalent didn't exist when I bought the Tamron but if it had I wouldn't have bought it for bulk, weight and cost reasons.
 
Thanks Geoff & Alan. I had looked at a Canon 24-105 F4L (on MPB) amongst others to complement the Tokina but then fell into thinking about a macro, then the Tamron came up and hey well.. I took the plunge! That said it might still be a good way to go. I've looked at a 17-50s, the Tamron included and good to hear its a sharp lens. I'd also been looking at the Sigma f2.8 which seems to get a thumbs up. In terms of sharpness, my other hobby is astronomy where "sharp" and "distortion free" tend to be the watchwords as far as the wallet will allow, so I'm perhaps a bit brain washed in that department! Thanks again.
 
The one I'd avoid is the 17-85mm IS USM. It's a very nice lens spec wise and the handling is nice but IMO there are too many optical issues with that lens and a 18-50mm f2.8 is IMO a better bet.
 
Thanks again Alan, and Bebop. Its useful to get informed personal opinions on equipment. I've read so many reviews on stuff and although I can see where there is a groundswell of positives, and/or negatives it can get a bit too much. Over the years acquiring astro' equipment its been a little similar. There's a tendency towards "paralysis through analysis", in the end you have to go with something and start learning from experience and hopefully enjoy the ride. This is where forums such as this are so valuable. Maybe I should have joined just a little sooner, although I think I'm OK so far! Regarding the purchase of another lens, I'm going to have to regroup a little financially, or maybe sell some astro' gear before the next cash layout. Even so its still good to window shop and gather knowledge.
 
You could try setting the in camera lens correction to 'enable' (if it isn't already), this may help to minimise the chromatic aberration. It'll be in the 'Red' menu somewhere, under lens correction.
 
Hi Dominic, thanks for the post. Yes, I did (eventually) turn on CA correction on the 700D and it does indeed make a difference, but arguably if in camera correction is so necessary to make results acceptable then its no better than what my mobile phone can do. However I do now have me the enjoyment in that the Tokina at 18mm is so much better without any correction.
 
Mobile phones do a lot of in device processing. You have to remember that the photo sensors in phones are tiny as are the lenses and there is almost certainly a lot more photo processing going on in the phone than in your DSLR and on your computer combined.

I find that mobile phone pictures can look absolutely stunning on the phone and even on a tablet but I've yet to see anything that can compare to my much larger sensor dedicated cameras once the picture is on my pc and I can look at it closely.

Often the stunning camera phone picture can be seen to have motion blur and smeared detail due to in device processing.
 
Hi Alan, agreed. Perhaps I was being a bit harsh. Finding my way back into something like acceptably decent photography (for me) I tend to think back to film days when I got some very nice results with what was then a fairly humble but useful Yashica FX-D plus lenses. I think I'm still trying to keep things simple.
 
Ryewolf said:
I understand your frustration, I bought a Canon 100D that came with a kit 18-55mm and kit 70-300mm MKIII lenses and they both suffered from CA and being fairly soft, about 9 months later I bought a Canon 24-105mm f4L it's been the best piece of optics I've bought and it's rarely been off my camera in 4 years.
Click to expand...

I dissimilar, but bought a sigma 18-50 f2.8 for the low light ability. Then went full frame and bought the 24-70 f2.8 ii and it is really good, but heavy!! The problem is I don't want to take anything lighter (and less quality) when going on holiday!!

The 24-105 may be my next purchase but in rf mount as have the eos r.
 
Alcor said:
Hi Alan, agreed. Perhaps I was being a bit harsh. Finding my way back into something like acceptably decent photography (for me) I tend to think back to film days when I got some very nice results with what was then a fairly humble but useful Yashica FX-D plus lenses. I think I'm still trying to keep things simple.
Click to expand...

Your APS-C DSLR should get you image quality beyond anything you got from film. Maybe it's just a question of getting used to it. Relatively soft kit lenses don't help but maybe fiddling with the in camera sharpness settings or seeing what gets the best results in whatever software you have on your pc might get you improved results.
 
woof woof said:
Your APS-C DSLR should get you image quality beyond anything you got from film. Maybe it's just a question of getting used to it. Relatively soft kit lenses don't help but maybe fiddling with the in camera sharpness settings or seeing what gets the best results in whatever software you have on your pc might get you improved results.
Click to expand...

Many thanks Alan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top