Why to make a review of a kit lens ?
I interested about it, before I bought, and the ones I find were too technical without real pictures.
The ‘new’ kit lens. I bought my camera without lens, so I made a research about the best options. This focal length is essential for ‘normal’ photography.
About the focal length: The most useful range of this equipment on the Aps-C camera is the wide (18 mm) setting. This focal length is used the most. There are alternatives lenses on the market originally designed for the full frame camera started from the 28mm (same field of view for full frame camera) setting. Lenses like Tamron 28-75 f2.8, canon 28-70 L, etc. If somebody likes to change lenses this lenses with an ultra wide angle (10-22, 10-20, etc) can be an option for this focal length, but I prefer the wider focal length without changing lenses always. According to me 28mm focal length is not enough for an Aps-C camera (too narrow). A 28-75mm lens make sense for portraits, but certainly too narrow for landscapes, and perhaps for group portrait shots inside also not the best.
The options are:
24-70/2.8 L, 24/105 f4 L, Tamron 17 50, Tamron 17 50 vc, Sigma 17 70, sigma 17 70 vc, Canon 18 55 II, Sigma 18 -50, sigma 17-50 os f2.8, canon 15-85 is
My main interest is wildlife so I don’t want to pay the price of a used car for a wide angle lens, this rules the first two, and the last (possible best quality) options out. Out of the rest for me the best bang for the buck seems the original 17 50 Tamron without vc, but it was very tempting the new kit lens because of the price, so I made a try. This new canon amazingly sharp with plenty of resolution, but contrast and saturation a little bit moderate. The stabilisation is very useful, easily make sharp pictures with 1/10 second. I cannot say though that lens is perfectly satisfy my taste. This is a very good compromise. The lens is sharper at the wide end, even wide open very good (f3.5). At the long end the lens is not so sharp, but still ok. The sharpest setting at the wide end at around f5.6, at the long end f8.
In bright sunlight can have flare problems, it needs to be cared with the exposure.
Compare to Tamron 17 50 My impressions: The canon has better resolution, but Tamron has better contrast and visibly wider, and more vivid, warmer colours. Some example in below. The Tamron built quality is better (feels 100% ok for me, only point can be made it is plastic). The difference in picture quality is not enough for me to buy it. Canon is sharper, Tamron has better contrast and colours. Real difference is the f2.8 aperture, perhaps very useful with the mentioned wide angle.
Compare to 15 85 is: Overall I cannot see big difference in picture quality. 15 85′s contrast a bit better, colours more natural, sharpness-resolution not sure better at all, or worse perhaps at borders, something similar. 15-85 autofocus ring usm, different class than the focus of the 18-55 is. The15-85 range is better, little wider (perhaps makes big difference for landscape shooters, for wide angle fans not enough I think), the 85mm part can be useful for portraits.
The most significant drawback of this lens is post processing or good camera settings. Without this pictures lacking contrast, and colour (according to my taste). With good post processing, I am happy with this lens perfomance. See my pictures for example Nagybörzsöny, note not all pictures made with this lens (some shots with canon 200/2.8 L), but the wide angle shots all made with the canon 18-55 is.
I like better and better this lens I mostly try to use it at the wide end at f3.5 or f5.6.
Bottom line: For the price highly recommended, perhaps this is the only lens most people ever needed.
My pictures with the lens can be seen in the below gallery:
Tamron 17 50 samples