Lens reviews aren’t as common as actual camera reviews, so I’m always glad to find some. There was a Canon EF-S 18-55mm IS review that I talked about a few weeks ago, and now there’s a new one. This review was posted at the-digital-picture.com.

As expected, the build quality is still pretty cheap and plastic. They point out that the “zoom ring makes a not-loud scratching/brushing noise inside the lens as it is rotated.” Sounds a little scary. I’ve only played with the original EF-S 18-55mm lens once or twice, but I don’t remember a scratching or brushing noise. Of course, I could have just blocked it out as if it was a traumatic event in my life. The upside of a cheap plastic construction is that you have a very lightweight lens, only 7 oz (200g).

Manual focusing is tough, what with the lack of full-time manual focus as on a Canon USM lens, and because, well, the lens just doesn’t sound designed for it:

Manual focusing with the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens is difficult at best. With no dedicated focus ring, this lens uses the extending portion of the inner barrel as its manual focus ring (see the thin ribbed ring at the end of the lens?). Since the inner barrel has a lot of play in it, the viewfinder image moves very noticeably during MF unless you use a very light and very precise touch.

On the plus side, they report that the autofocus is pretty good, generally pretty quiet and fast, considering that it’s a non-USM lens. And they point out that it can get away with a lesser AF system since the lens is so slow (f/3.5 to f/5.6); you’re going to get a relatively deep depth of field — when compared to a faster lens, like an f/1.8 — so the auto focus capabilities are less critical.

Also, Canon has improved the bokeh on this IS version of the lens over the old 18-55mm EF-S lens:

A shallow DOF with a blurred foreground/background is more difficult to produce with a slow lens than with a faster lens of the same focal length. The upside is that the 18-55 IS uses a new circular aperture that delivers a good quality OOF (Out of Focus) blur — a bit better than the 18-55 II. OOF points of light remain circles even with a stopped down aperture (where the number of blades and blade shape affect the results the most).

Canon states that the image stabilization in the lens should give you 4 stops of shake correction. The reviewer finds slightly less than that, but still an impressive amount of stabilization:

Canon is claiming 4-stops of camera shake correction. My personal experience shows a solid 3 stops of correction at 18mm and 3 stops or a little better at 55mm. I am basing my numbers on comparison testing using an identical shooting stance and situation (apples-to-apples). I am getting sharp images at or longer than 1/4 sec at 18mm and 1/6 sec at 55mm using a not-especially-stable standing position. Of course, if your subject is moving, you must be able to pan with them or your results will be blurred at these shutter speeds.

Perhaps the best part of the new IS design is that this entire lens costs less than the IS upgrade costs on Canon’s current lenses where this feature is optional (70-200mm L lenses). This is the least expensive Canon EF or EF-S lens ever offered with image stabilization.

How about the optical performance? The review states that it performs very well for the price of the lens, which sounds like a bit of a backhanded compliment to me.

From 18mm through 35mm or so, center sharpness is reasonable wide open and reaches its optimal sharpness at f/5.6. Corners in this focal length range are relatively sharp. Wide open center-of-the-lens performance remains similar throughout the focal length range until the long end where this lens becomes soft. At 55mm, even f/8 is not as sharp as I’d like to see.

Color is good but contrast could be a little better (this is most noticeable when comparing with the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens). CA is somewhat strong toward the corners but flare is very well controlled. Vignetting is not severe, but noticeable on the wide end.

He reports that it’s significantly sharper than the EF-S 18-55mm II non-IS lens, especially wide open in the corners of the frame. At f/8 and higher the difference is smaller, but the IS version still has an advantage.

Of course, then you look at the sample picture comparison between both of the 18-55mm lenses and the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens, as well as the more expensive Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM lens, and they just blow away both of the 18-55mm lenses. You can really see the difference between a cheap low-end lens and a much better lens in the comparison (scroll down the review page until you see the picture of the front of the GMC truck, and then look at the different shots available with the different lenses, all taken with a Canon 40D.)

Of course, it’s important to keep in mind that shooting those at 55mm means you are using the weakest focal length of the 18-55mm lens, so performance will be better if you’re not zoomed in that far. There’s another comparison further down the page of a tree and a roof that was shot at 18mm, which still shows a clear advantage to the more expensive lenses. There’s just no free lunch here. Too bad, I really enjoy free lunches, especially when the dessert is a sweet lens.

Anyway, be sure to check out the full review for all the details.