I was going to go with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens but I read some reviews and the downside is that it is disappointing in night or low light shots, has a lot of glare (whatever that means). I don't think all Canon lenses are like that so which one should I go for?























April 24th, 2009 at 10:17 am
Well, if you don't like the Canon 18-55mm, you should go for a Nikon camera with a Nikon 18-55mm, which is higher rated
But if you stick with Canon, then an alternative lens will depend upon how much you want to spend. For the money, the Canon 18-55mm is a good lens, but it's a consumer level lens. However, used properly, there's no reason why you can't use the Canon 18-55mm lens–AS LONG AS YOU UNDERSTAND THE LIMITATIONS and how to get around them.
For example: the claim that it's diappointing in night or low-light shots–handheld, this lens will have a challenge in night shooting. Heck, any lens will have issues being handheld in night shooting. Here's the real difference: expensive lenses in night shooting tend to be used by pros and serious advanced amateurs who know to USE A TRIPOD for night shooting. Likewise, in low light shooting, the camera and lens must be supported to keep everything steady. A better lens won't make up for poor technique. Yes, you can get a lens with a wide aperture (a "faster" lens) to let in more light, but it won't make up for poor technique.
A lot of glare: Use the lens hood. A lot of people don't use the lens hood for some reason. And avoid shooting into the sun–you can see the glare in the viewfinder. A good photographer will use the lens hood and choose shooting positions and shooting times to reduce flare/glare.
Bottom-line: there's nothing wrong with the Canon 18-55mm lens as a starting lens. Simply understand its limitations and how to work around them. Do that, and you won't have a problem. Later, as you better identify your needs, then you can spend a lot of money on more specialized lenses.