18-55mm IS vs 18-55mm non-IS

[lambchops511]

I am about to buy a Rebel XT kit with a 18-55mm lens but it is non-IS .... should I just buy a Rebel XT without the lens and then pickup the IS lens later?

is the IS lens worth the extra $100?

I also plan on getting a 50mm 1.8 Prime.....and hopefully save up for a 100mm 2.8 Macro USM

 

[dug777]

I understand that the non-IS one sucks donkey balls, but the IS one is actually pretty good.

Checkout www.photozone.com.de for reviews.

 

[lambchops511]

yeah, i think the IS is the better one, but do you pros think its worth the extra $100? (double the price)

my other option is......

buy the 100mm 2.8 Macro USM lens now......since i want to do macro photography......

and them save up for the 50mm prime or 18-55 when i have more money

 

[randomlinh]

I would spring for the kit 18-55 IS lens. Alternatively, get then Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. Another ~150-200 though...

I would not get the 100 macro first, unless you're damn positive you want to do that. I would find a 100mm prime very restrictive otherwise, and depending on your time frame for picking up another general lens, it might be counterintuitive to your goals.

If you really want to budget and shoot around, get the 50mm 1.8 over the 18-55 non IS. A) it's a dirt cheap lens that is great to have, B) it will force you to compose, C) from that, you can figure out what lens to get next.

 

[corkyg]

Originally posted by: randomlinh
I would spring for the kit 18-55 IS lens. Alternatively, get then Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. Another ~150-200 though... I would not get the 100 macro first, unless you're damn positive you want to do that. I would find a 100mm prime very restrictive otherwise, and depending on your time frame for picking up another general lens, it might be counterintuitive to your goals. If you really want to budget and shoot around, get the 50mm 1.8 over the 18-55 non IS. A) it's a dirt cheap lens that is great to have, B) it will force you to compose, C) from that, you can figure out what lens to get next.

That makes a lot of sense to me.

 

[Stan]

IS or not, the 18-55 is a poorly built lens that has rather reasonable image quality for the price. Read up on if you need IS or not. Get a 50mm instead.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: Stan
IS or not, the 18-55 is a poorly built lens that has rather reasonable image quality for the price. Read up on if you need IS or not. Get a 50mm instead.

well, the 50mm f/1.8 isn't built all that well either, heh. I personally would say don't put build quality as a top priority. Of course, I say this with the assumption the OP is new to all this with the intention of using these lenses to figure out what to sink his money into later.

I should also add, don't overlook the great used market for canon. That's a big reason why I've stuck with canon and didn't switch to pentax (yet... heh). It's so easy to buy and sell a canon lens w/o taking too much of a hit really. And you can usually find what you're looking for if you wait a little.