|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on April 11, 2016 Pros: no, maybe the wide range of focal lengths. Cons: chromatic aberrations, reflected in quintals, deformations, made by zoom lens 80 etc etc .. Opinion: One of the worst lenses used on Canon bodies, bought back in 2007, used, never satisfied me in terms of sharpness, the colors looked dull, vignetting on APS bodies to the minimum focal is a delusion is not acceptable in my opinion, the as well as against the hood Faulty are not included in the price, the crunch of bariolotto poor dustproof and the zoom movement in a vertical position, thankfully paid € 330 sold, after about 6 months to 290 €, I talk about my personal opinion the plasticcotto 18-55 for me was much better. Not recommended at all go on plasticotto species stm or II series. |
  | sent on April 11, 2016 Pros: Compact, good zoom range, good overall sharpness Cons: Price paid to new 12 years ago too, flex cable problem as many optical canon, lens hood sold separately. Opinion: At first I was excited about this lens for APS-c even though I came from 18-35 f3,5-4.5 Sigma EX with Canon 28-70 f2.8 L which I mounted on Eos and Eos 300D 3, then with the purchase the then output Eos 20D together with this new perspective I changed the two lenses for the latter to the modest sum of just under 500 €. The sharpness certainly has suffered a bit, especially at the edges at longer focal lengths, but the versatility to bring perspective rather all of them only two (the 28-70 weighed heavily) lightened quite the photographic backpack where even I lodged a 70-200 f . 2.8 on the teleconverter and 550EX flash. Everything went smoothly until the first time the display shows the message Err. 01, the very day that I had to baptize my son. And to think that until the day before everything worked perfectly. Checked if the problem was due to the camera body or optics, and found that with the other optical there were no problems whatsoever, sending the target out of warranty assistance are at the heart26egrave; easily tolerable, because if perhaps a professional part of the money you spend to keep their equipment efficiently, an amateur photographer hardly recover those costs, plus the fact that it must renounce the use of the same to repair carried out, because it is difficult to have two optics of equal or similar in their focal corredo.rnrnAggiunta of 13 April 2016rnQuando I got the flex cable, pay a few Euros (cost plus shipping and delivery), following the video found on Youtube (even if they do not explain the absolute all the steps, but they help a lot) after having dismantled, replaced the broken cable and reassembled exactly (the third attempt) everything finally works perfectly and with the euro spared I also took a view .stm to be devoted to videos or to use as a spare car if future.rnOtticamente necessity, contrary to what others may think (or is my copy which belongs to the first series when acquiwas when he was just out on the market 12 years ago, having also found some constructive difference in the disassembly phase) I like it and I think it quite clear, indeed. |
 | sent on January 08, 2016 Pros: Fast autofocus, ring stabilizer, good build quality, compactness. Cons: Opening 4/5.6, the barrel stretches if the lens is brought upside down. Opinion: Discreet all-rounder zoom from which you can draw good shots (depends on the skill of the photographer). It suffers from chromatic aberration, and distortions at the minimum focal point, however easily corrected. It is easily found on the internet at 230/250 euros and in my opinion it is a good deal. Needless to turn towards optics that cost twice as much, the result would be similar. And then if we look at optics like the canon 16/35 f2.8 series L II USM, it also highlights chromatic aberrations around 16mm, despite the cost between 1500/1800 euros. If you happen to try it, look at the results with your own eyes without listening to certain "professors". I noticed that with the "universal" lampshade aesthetically identical to the original, it suffers from vignette to the focal of 17mm. while the original Canon EW-73B does not. Is that why it costs over 30 euros? Despite using it since 2010 it has not given me any problem to the flex. |
 | sent on November 16, 2015 Pros: inexpensive, sturdy, well-built, autofocus quickly and accurately Cons: constructive problem of flex of diaphragm, after some wear and should be replaced Opinion: I used quest'attica combined with my 50D, I started to take this view ... in fact with subjects mainly sport ... that means to me is certainly worth the expense, of course is a bit 'dark as all 4-5.6 but remains capable of producing quality shots with an average-good PP next .... autofocus L series, then in fact no longer have produced the optics "kit" with the technology Ring-Usm (Vero) typical of the series professionalirnsostituito only for an offer with the Canon 17-40 F4 that for the present time I'm not quite exalted in comparison .... rnrnunica big minus, for more solvable with a little 'of the manual, is to replace the flex cable that controls the diaphragm ... after a while 'it is intended to break for a congenital problem of construction; all of course in relation to the use and in particular to the number of zoommaternsu internet there are numerous videos that explain step by step the replacement by farerngiusto to give an estimate of the cost of the part (diaphragm + flex cable alreadywelded) is around 20 euro shipped from china |
 | sent on August 11, 2015 Pros: Good esursione focal Cons: Without a hood. poor sharpness, distortion. It breaks the flat diaphragm. Opinion: Objective unsuccessful. With the machine shoulder extends the maximum focal length. After a few months of use by mistake 001. Brought to repair Del Pal in Pisa, (cost 150 euro) this tells me is a lack of almost any zoom Canon which are electric. I want to switch to Nikon that has the mechanical diaphragms and lenses do not suffer from this problem. I think to change the system. |
 | sent on January 04, 2015 Pros: Stabilizer, focal length, full time manual focus Cons: Sharpness, dark, distortion 17mm Opinion: I tried this' objective buying it used to replace the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 III of KIT, and I will tell you, covering the photos taken with the 'one and the' other, it is absolutely worth it make the move (someone had warned me ...). Surely the stabilizer works well and looks a quantum leap important for those who do not l 'has ever experienced, as well as the opportunity to correct always the focus manually. But it is too faint, the 'image loses a lot when you move away from the center of' frame, the results are often disappointing. I much prefer the 18-55 kit! |
 | sent on December 24, 2014 Pros: Good construction, USM real fast, good stabilization. Cons: Really poor sharpness, brightness non-existent, is annoying autofocus camera bodies not recent (error 99) Opinion: I bought this lens a while ago and then I sold because I was disappointed fully, a really beautiful building, a USM motor is very convenient and a good stabilization, even if the first generation, but it is a lens all smoke and no fire, very dark, it is preferable to use the flash or iso high even in areas not too dark, very comfortable, however, the value of (17) wide-angle, when used with small apertures may be comfortable in the landscapes, maybe on the road, only in the light of sun even if you suffer from flare .... |
 | sent on October 01, 2014 Pros: focal length, motor usm, good construction Cons: distortion, aberration Opinion: I used the years of 50d kit and I must say that a great all-round good build quality (all plastic) has an af ultrasound and a good focal ecursione to 85 f5.6 takes pictures with beautiful blur, only fault with hood or filter chromatic aberration and clear with red especially in the light of day course for the band quality / price which could be inserted and insert the supplied lens hood .consigliato better than 18-55 |
 | sent on September 25, 2014 Pros: Focal length, stabilizer, speed AF Cons: Sharpness, brightness, resistance to flare, construction, AC Opinion: Objective taken in kit with 60d, taking a few months and resold. RNE 'a good lens to learn as it offers a decent quality (although the last 18-55 is better) and has a great excursion focale.rnQuest'ultima would make a good handyman to travel, to keep the machine in the morning in the evening so as not to take too many weights, but the brightness is very poor and forced him to raise the ISO on APSC .. and .... well, not the best .. RNA 17mm distortion is quite important, but since it can take on LR with a few clicks. Rather resistance to flare is very poor, and even the AC is rather less fastidiosa.rnLa thing that ticked me off is maybe the sharpness, nothing exceptional (although in the printing results are not bad). Really great stabilizer, which allows you to retrieve something that is lost with the low light. Very well the AF, really fast. rnih synthesis: the new price is definitely too high. I took it in kit only for convenience, but I would not consigliarlo at full price. |
 | sent on August 12, 2014 Pros: Veratilità, af fast and stabilizer that does its job. Cons: Distortion at 17mm and suffers greatly in the flare against the light ... Opinion: I use this lens for the past three years and I have to say that it worthily his work in combination with my 40D, I appreciate the versatility for which this lens is nata.rnNon need to make comparisons with the L series as many do, but you have to evaluate what was born, that is, a lens tuttofare.rnUnico big problem I had was the rupture of the diaphragm in assistance Canon repaired in 15 days at a cost of 75 euro ..... rnIo I am very happy with the 17-85 and gave me great satisfaction ..... |
 | sent on April 27, 2014 Pros: Fast AF, image stabilizer, good range of focal lengths Cons: Chromatic aberration, lens front which tends to fall forward very easily Opinion: Purchased used and in excellent condition in 2013, I was able to use the lens only with an EOS 1100D but believe me, it is not wasted! RnStupefacente - at least to me, that before I had only 18-55 of the series - the speed of the system AF, while I've noticed great improvements in terms of sharpness (which, however, I can not complain). rnHa right who highlights the chromatic aberration of this objective, monstrous but nearly always correctable with a few clicks in postproduction; distortion at 17mm, although obvious, is much less fastidiosa.rnHo solved the problem of the front lens using a simple elastic: put in the right way makes it "hard" zoom and prevents elongation of the lens, but there ' you need to move it when you want to change the length focale.rnCon a lightweight body such as the 1100D 17-85 tends to overreach forward making the camera less comfortable to hold in hand, but it is certainly not a fault of the lens! |
 | sent on January 04, 2014 Pros: Motor usm, stabilizer, the focal range. Cons: Dark, zoom "give up" without a block. Opinion: Aim to have everything to do with it, so much suffering to 17 mm of distortion, the brightness is not his forte but luckily the stabilizer helps a lot and you can recover some stop increasing the time as long as you shoot a static subject especially in the evening. The ultrasonic motor is quiet and fast (light permitting of course) the barrel is quite heavy and it may happen that walking zooming fall at all! Nothing bad but sin that canon has not already equipped with a lock. |
 | sent on June 01, 2013 Pros: Excursion Focal, stabilizer, USM Cons: Low resistance to Flare Opinion: And 'un'obbiettivo that I took with the 60D kit. It has all in all a good zoom range and good image quality at maximum focal length that progressively decreases with decreasing of the same. The stabilizer works well and allows you to shoot with safety times in many situations and has a fast and accurate focusing. With very short focal distorts and has enough vignetting, things correctable in PP, but the thing that creates problems is the low resistance to flare that is not easily correggibile.rnHa still a good general construction when compared to the typical kit lens and economic light enough to carry around all day. |
 | sent on May 21, 2013 Pros: Good stabilizer Cons: Shortly bright, distortion and vignetting. Opinion: Had borrowed for a weekend and honestly I was not dissapointed, I think the 18-55 is both better. And 'dim, 17 distorts a lot, and often notice a marked vignetting. The only plus point is the stabilizer which is good, but it's hard to find a stabilizer scarce, the rest is good facale the range of 17 to 85, but the quality leaves something to be desired. I do not recommend it. |
 | sent on March 25, 2013 Pros: Focal length, construction, AF, stabilizer Cons: Lack of sharpness, chromatic aberration, very dark Opinion: I've used it primarily as an objective "all-rounder" travel. Apart from the AF fast and accurate enough have never been satisfied by the quality of the images. I was able to test it thoroughly on a Canon 50D and a 300D, with results below expectations. The clarity is low, closing at f8 f9 improves slightly, but need to increase the shutter speed dramatically. In situations of conflict chromatic aberration is very obvious, not always in PP are able to improve it. I would not recommend it unless it is at a bargain price and you do not have big needs in terms of quality. |
 | sent on January 29, 2013 Pros: Lightweight construction, AC almost absent, focal range, stabilizer, accurate focusing fast and quiet, full time manual focus, focus ring very fluid, smooth zoom ring Cons: sharpness, zoom extends alone (ring too soft) Opinion: is the first lens that I had and with which I could experiment with different photography techniques. As a handyman allows you to travel light but sure to bring home something decent. The stabilizer allows you to feel comfortable with the times and shoot at 1/15s at 85mm is never a problem. How valuable has the color rendition, very natural. The sharpness is not his forte and even the brightness (from 4 to 5.6) but has a blurred quite soft and pleasant. Touch has excellent ergonomics and durability. I recommend it as a lens for long movements (such as visits to the city or hiking in the mountains). |
 | sent on March 01, 2012 Pros: Good handyman, stabilization, ultrasonic motor, center sharpness Cons: AC, Flare often present, short focal distortion, vignetting short focal Opinion: Purchased in a kit with the 50d has a good quality / price ratio if purchased under 350 euro. Not much light the IS helps a lot when you're shooting handheld and good zoom range allows often to find the focal length in use. Solid construction and excellent noise. Nothing to say with regard to the speed of focus. I would recommend to first-time photographers (like me!) And budget (always like me!) But if you want to take pictures technically better look good to other goals. |
 | sent on March 01, 2012 Pros: Value for money, good construction, and USM is valid, well-defined center and edge Cons: Distortion at short focal, a bit of chromatic aberration, not very bright Opinion: L I purchased a few months ago to replace at 18-55, with regard to weight and dimension of course has been a general increase, the construction is good, only the ring of focal feel that smolla a little with time. Chromatic aberration in areas of high contrast and distortion at short focal said this, however, has well-defined even at the edges by adding discrete macro capability. I recommend it as a middle step to lens in the kit, but without excessive demands. USM and is working very well and the help of some low-light lens. Highly recommended hood. A good all-round to keep mounted on the SLR, has some flaws maybe even too much but can give good photos when used with care. Do not spend ourselves over 350 € new |
 | sent on January 24, 2012 Pros: Zoom range, image stabilization, USM AF motor ring, solid Cons: outdated model, distortion at short focal Opinion: I received this light kit with my 50D. For me it is a perspective that makes his dirty job but nothing more. The stabilizer works well (you recover at least 2 stops). The USM motor is good and being ring allows you to be able to intervene even in manual mode, when working in af. Has a good strength and sufficient resistance to external agents. You can not ask to be excellent in all its operating range, otherwise we would be faced with a series L, another planet in fact. I have chosen especially for use in travel photography, street, with the opportunity to take advantage, however, not only a wide angle for landscapes but also a medium telephoto for portraits and details. I never had big problems with Chromatic Aberration, while actually the shorter focal you have some distortion, the more evident as it is in the presence of lines passing through the frame (horizons linear, vertical lines of buildings etc.). Vignetting can not find much exceptssiva, and I do not bother you, without considering that there are those who introduces her to mail in PP, when you do not have it :-). It 'sa f/4-5.6 so do not think that you buy just to make indoor photos, but if you use it mainly outdoors you will not have big problems. This is a view which is fine for a while everything is ok in some situations other just enough, and in some extreme cases it may be poor, you just know it and try to make the most of. It will not be this light your silver bullet, but certainly, if you need something like this and you can find used, in good condition and at a good price, you could come in handy. |
 | sent on January 23, 2012 Pros: Range of focal lengths, stabilization, USM. Cons: Unsatisfactory image quality at least up to 35mm, dark. Opinion: Of all the goals that I bought was by far the one that disappointed me the most. The image quality of up to 35mm is really just fine for the lack of clarity, as compared with the "stabilotto", the 18-55 IS kit you offer, from 18 to 35 there is no match for the quest ' last. To this is added a strong distortion least up to 20-22mm, a strong vignetting always the focal low (problem altogether inferior to others, it corrects PP), and the fact that it is still a dark lens. Finally, it was not exactly a slow economy, so with a negative value for the price. Pros: good range of the focal (from wide angle to medium telephoto on APS-C), good stabilizer and fast AF. It must be said that the quality of image improves significantly over 35mm to overcome also the stabilotto from 40mm onwards. Ultimately a lens that does not recommend it, absolutely outclassed by the new 15-85 and 17-55 always absolutely not comparable to the Canon of the house. |
 | sent on January 22, 2012 Pros: Construction, stabilizer, fast AF, good sharpness, quality / price ratio Cons: AC very strong up to 70 mm, TA vignetting, distortion at 17 mm, exceeded by 15-85 Opinion: After using the "plasticotto" 18-55 for almost 5 years, it was my first real goal. Having photographed very often in poorly lit places (museums, churches, etc. ...) I absolutely needed to have the stabilizer and with satisfactory quality in terms of sharpness. Bought as a kit with the Canon 60D, was one of the last pieces. Then go to a focal length of up to 85 mm (136 mm on FF) enabled me to capture photos that otherwise would have to take changing goal. Important and a must buy is the hood, preferably in the original because it is velvety. If I dwell on against I can simply say that many aspects of "negative" are easily corrected in PP. |
 | sent on October 18, 2011 Pros: Range of Focal, Focus fast, stable, solid Cons: sharpness, vignetting, AC, dark Opinion: I bought it as a substitute for plasticotto obtained when you purchased the SLR. The first impression was very positive, was much more solid 18-55 with the flying metal and heavier than what I was accustomed. The focus was the second surprise, much faster than the starter kit but in low light conditions hobbled in engaging the subject. The range of focal lengths on the other hand is a point in its favor, equivalent to a 27-136, it adapts to many situations. On the other hand is quite dark and to get photos with good sharpness you have to close one or two stop until f/7-f/8, making it poorly suited to theaters, not illuminatissime homes, gyms and the like. Another shortcoming was the presence of AB at room temperature, especially at shorter focal, which made him unfit to resume strong contrsti color. Overall, like Sarah, I would not recommend it because it is useful for photographers who want a multipurpose lens without the need for special sharpness or quality. |
user181  | sent on October 12, 2011 Pros: Range of focal lengths, stabilization, ultrasonic motor Cons: too dark, poor sharpness and distortion at short focal, excessive vignetting Opinion: I bought it on a trip, because I was missing a lens "handyman" and I wanted that had a good range of focal lengths, stabilization and especially that pathetic madness. I have to say but unfortunately I was not enthusiastic: the vignetting is too high especially at 17mm (some can be corrected in camera raw, but it is a big hassle having to continually repeat this process for each picture!). Despite is, even at full aperture remains a lens rather dark, totally unsuitable for such photograph the interior. The sharpness is not the best especially at shorter focal: also closing at f / 8 f / 9 photos were always quite mixed and lacking in detail. Improves contrast, especially in the central part of the frame, the longer focal lengths: I was able to make good portraits mostly 85mm. So in short, I have often thought that the 18-55 is I owned before (plasticotto kit comes with all the amateur cameras) in some ways is better ... I am not really recommend this lens ... But if you are to need it for the same reasons that I bought it myself, but who knows what will not be decently his work! |
 | sent on October 12, 2011 Pros: Image stabilization, USM Cons: now surpassed by his successor 15-85, distortion at 17mm. Opinion: Great compressed quality and zoom. Has a range of focal lengths from wide angle to short telephoto which ensures the outputs "read" to bring a single goal. To be very satisfactory for photos macro acclimatized. As for the optical non-L lens hood is (essential) to be bought separately. The sharpness is good and the maximum stopping down to f / 8. The corners at full aperture remain quite soft. There is a noticeable distortion at 17mm. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
