EF-S 18-135 mm f/3,5-5,6 IS ... is .... (I'm disgusted)

[Tabazan]

Hello to all,


Just received today the 18-135 for my 50D. And it's a very sad day.


Blurry at any f. (even less sharp than the 18-55 IS !, what's more ... on a tripod), AF often skates ...


Asked Canon who told me "Yeah ? If you want good lenses, take a "L"" ... or buy a Nikon I tought to myself ...


I don't accuse (has my item specific problems ?), but it's really worrying (for me and my budget) and for future owners of 7D + kit.


I returned the lens the same day for exchange... and saw today DP pre-test.


Has Canon the same quality control as Sigma now ?


Or are they really cheating us with that kind of stuff ?

[Fast Glass]

Hello to all,


Just received today the 18-135 for my 50D. And it's a very sad day.


Blurry at any f. (even less sharp than the 18-55 IS !, what's more ... on a tripod), AF often skates ...


Asked Canon who told me "Yeah ? If you want good lenses, take a "L"" ... or buy a Nikon I tought to myself ...


I don't accuse (has my item specific problems ?), but it's really worrying (for me and my budget) and for future owners of 7D + kit.


I returned the lens the same day for exchange... and saw today DP pre-test.


Has Canon the same quality control as Sigma now ?


Or are they really cheating us with that kind of stuff ?






<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

Are you saying that your lens was a bad copy or a bad lens? All lens manufacturershave bad copies of there lenses, even Canon.

[Tabazan]

At this time I don't know.


I sent it back and wait for the result


In 2009, the bad copy syndrom for Canon (yeah, THE brand - "we can" and so on) becomes a luxury I don't think they can afford on a short term.


But ... I dare believe in a so comptetitive market, that someone, somewhere at Canon, keep an eye on the production quality, and don't just drop things on the shelves. I hope (?!) that it will be a bad copy.


No need to be Einstein to understand that the average (rich) guy who buy a 7D + 18-135 and get with so low level of quality (even if the 7D is ... maybe ... good) will be a ... future good Nikon client.

[Daniel Browning]

Blurry at any f. (even less sharp than the 18-55 IS !

I am not surprised that it is less sharp than the 18-55 IS, because that kit lens is just about fantastic. The 18-200 and 17-85 don't do much better than the 18-55 either.

[DavidEccleston]

When the lenses were announced, I figured Canon was attempting to improve their kit lens EF-S lineup. When I saw Bryan's ISO charts go up last week I realized that, no, they're not improving anything.


I imagine the lens will put many people off Canon. They'll take a few shots with their kit lens and return it, disgusted, like you were... Except they'll more often than not be returning their 7D and 50D along with the lens. I don't see these lenses as a wise long term strategy.

[mattsartin]

i don't think this lens, or even the 15-85mm (which i've heard nothing about) were made with professionals in mind. these were made for Joe Consumer who doesn't know much about SLRs and are satisfied with lower quality glass. There's a reason you have to pay ~$1000 for a 17-55mm f/2.8 I can't imagine that Nikkor 18-55s or similar length lenses have much better IQ

[Tabazan]

Hello,


I fully agree with you, but as SLR are clearly upgraded in price, and is still NOT a professional range (according to Canon) , even though SLR have more and more pro features, I believe Canon don't have in mind the financial aspect of photography business and the actual financial situation for everyone. Photography is not a cash cow anymore. Exceptions apart, when I see professionals photographers around me, they don't have unlimited budgets and getting work is more and more difficult, and "average clients" tend to reduce photography costs, and sometimes do the work themselves.


I think today, a renown company can't release someting "average", except if it's a really low budget item. But don't forget that the 18-135 will be in kit with the "technology
stuffed, blah, blah" and quite pricey 7D (the pride of Canon). Absurd. Will they put "warning : poor lens for poor dudes included on our magnificient 7D" ?


Canon clearly wants the SLR market, which is much more interesting than the pro market (how much pro lenses are released ?), but if they cheat, it won't last long.


Think of the work Sigma will have to do to get rid of it's "bad control quality" sticker which made it lose a big part of the market...


That said, This lens is still at around 400$ which is already expensive ... (yeah, it's 400$, not 25$ and in "the Daddy and Mommy who know if a pic is sharp or not and read internet forums to compare", reputation is quickly lost ) for something that really don't do the job (and even less than a 100$ cheapo lens) an for the "average Joe". The 18-55 is cheapo, and nobody expects miracles.


Releasing non reliable product is a very dangereous game for Canon because of the competition, and also because photography is not the main budget for "average Joe". I didn't bought Sigma lenses mainly because of that "quality control" problem, but if Canon enters that league, for the price, I know which one I'll chose.


Anyway, maybe it's a bug in the start of production. Maybe not. And according to me, it's a serious commercial error.


Back to the lens ... it's not average, but really poor. And I don't like to say that.

[Tabazan]

David,


Completely right.


If I buy a 400$ lens, I want something for my 400$. Not the bottom of a water bottle with stabilizer.


I own a 8mm fisheye "exotic" (russian) Peleng. It's a tank (all metal). It's price is more than cheap (one buy it only for fun, usually, not for serious photography) but it does extremly sharp images on a "stupid customer" 1000D. And my Canon (oooohh) new (aaah) 18-135 is sharper as my aunt glasses.


"I imagine the lens will put many people off Canon" : Bingo !


What's more is Canon reply to my mail, that (almost) said "back to the doghouse, amateur, you wanted s***, you got it. Buy L at 1200$ if your want your picts to be sharp". Incredible. Any sales rep would collapse when hearing this.


I think I know why Brian hasn't made the review yet. And he's right.

[dazzlingboy]

.


I imagine the lens will put many people off Canon. They'll take a few shots with their kit lens and return it, disgusted, like you were... Except they'll more often than not be returning their 7D and 50D along with the lens. I don't see these lenses as a wise long term strategy.

Firstly - Hi! New here - been shooting Canon for years (from S40 to G6 to 20D to 30D to G9 and now 7D) and am more of a forum "lurker" than contributor. This lens however has forced me to register here and post.


I am one of those people that David refers to in his post. Bought the 7D and 18-135 kit last week as an upgrade to my aging 30D. Shot maybe 300 frames over the weekend with it as well as maybe 200 with other lenses. Also some comparison shots with the old 30D. Results with the 18-135 were, without exception, poor regardless of which body it was on. Results with other lenses (and I don't have a cupboard full of L lenses) were great on the 7D.


Tried the micro-adjustment tests - not exactly lab conditions but I was thorough and what the results told me was that the lens was best at 0 - exactly what I'd been shooting so no need to adjust.


Went back to the shop today and handed the whole lot back and paid a few &pound;&pound;&pound; to upgrade to the 15-85 IS USM kit - looking forward to trying that out this weekend.


It amazes me that Canon have shipped this new amazing body with such a low quality lens. Is this just to keep the cost down? Presumably so. Maybe they assume that purchasers at this level are going to have better glass to put on anyway - same way a &pound;5000 road cycle comes with no pedals - they assume that someone at that level is going to have specific preferences/requirements. However a large number won't and just want to get out and take high quality photos without spending another fortune on lenses. If that was the call, they'd be better just shipping body only? Or bring out a decent EF S L lens kit and charge accordingly.


I just hope the 15-85 produces the goods, otherwise, for the first time ever, I may be heading to the Nikon display!

[Tabazan]

Hello to all,


I received the18-135 back from wholesaler (don't think it event went to Canon, which wasn't even interested in having more informations ). It's a a new one. It is still as bad as the 18-55 IS (and even worse at some F/).


I sell it.


I think that Canon got all wrong on this take. I know they need to drag "amateurs" to the highly profitable market of the semi-pro market and later on the pro market ... maybe.


Becoming a member of the CPS requires only to have the right gear, not being a professional. It's a financial criteria, not a qualitative one.


Just to say that, when I began photography (and I'm young at it) I didn't know (care ?) about F/, bokeh and so on. Now I progressed. And as I enter the $ 1000 gear category , I'm better at choosing what I want, and what is worth (for me) - but not in that case _.


Selling the 18-135 (with or w/o the 7D) is a rip-off. Or sell it at 50$, for people who need a 50$ quality lens. No to me, thanks.


The stupid thing about this commercial strategy, is that I was seriously thinking of buying soon a 5D mark II (to add to my 50D) to make my first steps in the FF world... which implies L lenses ... for sure.


I'll buy it anyway (I'm a dumb faithfull customer, for the moment)


But knowing that Canon finally don't really mind much to release something that don't do the job, which will be bought by people who begin to care and have better knowledge (thanks to DP [] ), is p****** me off.


At this price (the 5d mk II + L lenses) ... isn't it worth to jump directly to Nikon ?? I would be pleased to hear some shock arguments from Canon to know how they keep a future "pro" customer...


I read a lot of things about calibration problems, software updates (even on the brand-new-and-tested 7D ... at this price !), and I really fear about buying, say, a 70-200 F4 IS at 1200 $ if there's 50% chances that I need to send it back, for 4-5 weeks, for calibration. I need to work with that, not waiting while reading user manuals.


Ok, other companies have the same flaws I suppose. I't not a valid reason. Market is hard. Gaining one more customer is hard. It's the same for everyone of us, and that's why we try to work better and better. Why not Canon ?


Practice makes prefect, they say. Well, no good news for Canon.