Author: | | Senior Member Registered: October, 2011 Location: San Jose Del Monte Posts: 198 1 user found this helpful | Review Date: February 15, 2013 | Recommended
| Rating: N/A |
Pros: | Reasonably sharp | Cons: | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K-01
| | | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: February, 2012 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 464 2 users found this helpful | Review Date: October 26, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $49.00
| Rating: 10 |
Pros: | Price; Handling, and IQ | Cons: | some CA and aberrations | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K5/K7/K10D
| | Excellent lens.
Actually I sold out my K7 kit WR like two years ago. However after using the alternative 16-45 for a while I regretted....SO I got this as used (9/10) from KEH at a low price: $49.
What can I and what should I complain? NOTHING. EVEN with some soft wide-open and CA, this is still a superb lens with stupidly low price.
Handling: That's the main reason why I abandoned the 16-45. This one is smaller, however there is no $200 difference on IQ between the two lenses. Even the wide-open is kind soft, however it is still good and very usable.
And with 25cm min focus distance, this one does a good job.
Rembmer: There is no "bad lens" when step down to F8.
| | | | New Member Registered: September, 2008 Location: Cleveland, Ohio, USA Posts: 1 | Review Date: August 2, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $75.00
| Rating: 8 |
Pros: | Light weight | Cons: | Slow | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K100D
| | I recently bought this lens and have used it in the last few days. I would say that I am satisfied with the overall quality and working of this lens. A good kit lens at this price.
| | | | Veteran Member Registered: September, 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Posts: 12,285 | Review Date: July 15, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 8 |
Pros: | Inexpensive, light, small, descent optics | Cons: | Hunts for AF in low light, meh bokeh | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 6
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 10
Value: 10
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K-5 and K-x
| | I've owned both the DAL and II versions of this lens. I sold the DAL version to try out the II version with quick shift, net cost to me $25. It's definitely a nice compact little lens with descent performance. I bought my sister a D60 (she wanted Nikon, go figure) and our kit lens seriously outperforms the equivalent Nikon lens. I haven't seen any meaningful difference between my two 18-55s other than the quickshift, which is a very nice feature.
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: November, 2010 Location: New Berlin, WI Posts: 528 2 users found this helpful | Review Date: June 26, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | Inexpensive, very sharp when stopped down. | Cons: | Need PP for great contrast and color rendition | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: New
Camera Used: Kx, K5
| | Much better lens than the original DA 18-55mm F3.5-5.6. This is a very good outdoor lens, not the type of lens you can use indoor without a flash BUT on sunny weather stop it down to f9 or f11 and you'll get very sharp images. Sweet setting is f9 and 35mm.
| | | | Senior Member Registered: May, 2012 Posts: 111 | Review Date: May 7, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $170.00
| Rating: 8 |
Pros: | cheap, handy, autofocus relatively quick, light | Cons: | aperture is too slow, focus ring is way too difficult to use in manual focus, a little soft at 55mm, autofocus not focusing correctly? | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 9
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K-r
| | It's okay. I don't mind it, I wouldn't use it as a main lens though. I just can't stand the aperture.
| | | | New Member Registered: December, 2011 Posts: 1 | Review Date: December 26, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | nice zoom range, wide angle, nice colour, versatile, light weight, comes with hood | Cons: | poor contrast, sometimes soft at 18mm and 55mm | Sharpness: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: New
| | This is excellent for a kit lens. 18-55mm is a great range, especially since it offers a very wide angle. The color is also great, though the contrast is rather poor. Sometimes images at the 18mm and 55mm are a little fuzzy, but a pretty sharp image can easily be achieved in the middle. It's not very fast and the focusing range is short, meaning that after about ten feet the subject can no longer be isolated. However, this lens is well built for a kit lens and very versatile. It works well for portraits, landscapes, and snapshots. It's a great basic lens with and it has the potential to capture colorful, sharp images and nice bokeh for the aperture range it has. For those new to digital SLR photography, it is a must. It's best to start out with a lens like this to find one's niche and then buy a nice prime lens and/or telephoto zoom based on one's photographic interests. | | | | Junior Member Registered: October, 2011 Location: Belton, SC Posts: 33 2 users found this helpful | Review Date: October 31, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | great kit lens | Cons: | none for a kit lens | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: Used
| | This has been a great little lens for me. I've had nothing but fun with it and hopefully that will continue. Its the best kit lens out there, period. My girlfriend is a Canon user and she is so jealous of this little gem. It handles quite well for a smaller lens. I love the hood that comes with it too, works like a charm, and is quite well-built too. All-in-all a great little lens to have. IMGP7841-Edit by carlin.lusk, on Flickr IMGP8150-Edit by carlin.lusk, on Flickr
| | | | New Member Registered: November, 2008 Location: Albuquerque Posts: 12 | Review Date: August 15, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 6 |
Pros: | Light weight, decent kit lens, good for beginners | Cons: | Slow, Low-light performance, auto focus accuracy | Sharpness: 6
Aberrations: 5
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 3
Handling: 8
Value: 7
| | This is a regular kit lens and since I have moved to the older primes, I have never looked back. I just can not duplicate the precision on the primes with this kit lens and the low light performance is rarely accurate . But the kit lens is solid overall for what comes with the camera.
| | | | Forum Member Registered: April, 2009 Location: Treviso (Italy) Posts: 87 | Review Date: August 8, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $45.00
| Rating: 8 |
Pros: | Dimension, lightweight, price | Cons: | soft at 55mm | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 9
Value: 9
| | Excellent all-around lens. It's light, little and well build.
It's quite sharpness but could be better at 55mm (this size is the weakness of this lens).
| | | | Veteran Member Registered: December, 2007 Location: Vancouver, BC Posts: 1,016 1 user found this helpful | Review Date: July 9, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $120.00
| Rating: 10 |
Pros: | Too many to list here...a gem of a lens, and an absolute STEAL at the price... | Cons: | none from me...it's outstanding...and the new one's even waterproof... | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| | The pics:
Cheers,
Cameron
| | | | Veteran Member Registered: March, 2009 Location: Ohio, USA/ India Posts: 478 | Review Date: May 31, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
Pros: | compact, decent IQ, great hood | Cons: | | | Considering that this is just a kit lens it packs quite a bit for a modest price. It is great for travel as it is so light and you can take it on tough hikes without worrying about babying it. I found it great for outdoor work and would definitely recommend getting it for a beginner to experiment with to find out what one's favorite focal length is in wide to normal range. [/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/9678931@N07/5510620115/]IMGP9411[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/9678931@N07/]arvindh76[/url], on Flickr" target="_blank"> IMGP9411 by arvindh76, on Flickr | | | | Veteran Member Registered: November, 2009 Location: Brisbane Posts: 3,561 | Review Date: May 15, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 7 |
Pros: | Good for kit lens | Cons: | Slow, cheap build ,soft wide open | | Ive had this lens since 2008, havent used it in a long time,
but for a kit lens its quite good, the sweet spot for this lens is about f/6.7-f/8
stay in that range and it will make some nice photos.
CONS- Slow, cheap build, and soft wide open.
| | | | Veteran Member Registered: February, 2009 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 3,757 2 users found this helpful | Review Date: March 29, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 9 |
Pros: | cheap, sharp, flare resistant, small & light | Cons: | slow | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
| | I'm in complete agreement with Zivelot's review.
I'm wholeheartedly recommending this little guy. Like many others, I dismissed it at the beginning, because it was a kit lens. (And because of that, it seemed less sharp than other lenses.) But its performance beyond 5.6 is excellent. I tried many primes and zooms, and I can say this lens does an excellent job in daylight (or on a tripod). But it's not bad even wide open. Most cheap primes one can get on ebay (except the fifties) are not much sharper than the kit lens. (Actually, I think most are less sharp at comparable apertures.) I use DxO with it, and below 50mm the DxO-ed images from the "kit lens" can compete with any prime.
As with any lenses, there can be variation among copies... I've had three copies of the DA AL II and one copy of the DA WR. I also tried two other DA WR's that came with a friend's K-5's--the first K-5 had stains on the sensor, so he got a second one) as well as a number of DA AL's. In my experience, the DA AL II version is the best: higher consistency from one copy to another and less difference in IQ from the wide end to the tele end. The DA AL aren't bad either, although they tend to suffer between 45 and 55mm. I was disappointed with the DA WR's: all of the three copies I had the chance to give a try had quite severe softness on one side or another between, say, 18 and 20mm, wide open--and not only wide open. I guess the WR construction may have put some constraints on the optical elements, or maybe I simply had bad luck with them.
In any case, the AL II's have been at least very good. The last copy I got--which I'm not going to give away just to get a more expensive zoom that either backfocuses, or is decentered, or...--is perfect. With DxO's help, it can produce wonders.
I used a 16-45mm for a year. While the 16-45mm is an excellent lens, I believe its virtues tend to be overstated. Wide open, it is sharper than the kit lens, but not by much. For me, its very useful 16mm is compensated by the compactness and the diminutive size of the 18-55mm. No protruding elements at 18mm with this one. Subjectively, I liked the DxO-ed images of the 18-55 more than the DxO-ed pics of the 16-45. After PP in DxO, the images from both lenses looked very sharp, with the 16-45mm having the edge in terms of sharpness (really, extremely sharp). But the DxO-ed images from the kit lens appeared to have finer contrast.
To sum up: cheap wide-to-normal zoom, capable of great performance, especially above f5.6, fast AF (in good light). If you have DxO and have a couple of primes for low light and special effects, I can see no reason for buying a much more expensive zoom for everyday purposes. (I'm talking about everyday purposes here: weddings and such may require something like a Tamron 28-75mm 2.8.)
| | | | New Member Registered: January, 2011 Posts: 1 | Review Date: January 20, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
Pros: | cheapest wide lens out there, overall good quality for it's price | Cons: | slow, not so well built | | I have got it with K20D.
It has so-so build quality ie. loose front extruding part in my case. But not being fullmetal, it is lightweight. It's rather slow at 35 and 50mm.
It has quite nice image quality however. Apart from some distortion/chroma/softness at far end, it is nice lens indeed. And I believe it's the only affordable lens at around 20mm.
AF, matrix exposition as well as being the cheapest "wide" lens out there while still having perfect 35mm spot makes it nice casual-walk-around lens and in some cases the widest lens you have. It won't hurt to keep it just in case even while using other lenses.
| | |