18-55mm STM f/3.5 vs f/4

I've ordered a T7i with 18-55 STM f/4. I have an 18-55 STM f/3.5 with my 650D. Of course I'll be able to test both lenses, but I'm wondering if there are any good test comparisons. I haven't been able to find any.

TDP usually has a pretty good write-up...

The Digital Picture

R2

R2D2 wrote:

TDP usually has a pretty good write-up...

The Digital Picture

Thanks. That review finally said near the end, "Specifically comparing the f/4-5.6 IS STM to its predecessor, the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Lens, we see the older lens performing better in the wide angle periphery and the newer lens performing significantly better at the long end. I prefer the results of the f/4-5.6 overall, though if using the lens primarily at 18mm with scenes requiring sharper corners (such as landscapes), the older lens may be the better choice."

seri_art wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

TDP usually has a pretty good write-up...

The Digital Picture

Thanks. That review finally said near the end, "Specifically comparing the f/4-5.6 IS STM to its predecessor, the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Lens, we see the older lens performing better in the wide angle periphery and the newer lens performing significantly better at the long end. I prefer the results of the f/4-5.6 overall, though if using the lens primarily at 18mm with scenes requiring sharper corners (such as landscapes), the older lens may be the better choice."

Onestly i dont find myself with the results of the f3.5 version from digital picture. Mine at 55mm is as sharp as at 18mm.

I think they should have near or less the same performances but with different sizes and aperture.

MikeJ9116 wrote:

I have not used the f/3.5 STM version but do own the f/4.0 lens. While I can't personally compare IQ between them, I do find I prefer the f/4.0 version for three reason not related to IQ. First is the smaller size. It just fits better on the SL2. Second is the zoom action. It zooms in and out directly without the breathing effect of the previous lenses. I find this makes the zoom action smoother. Especially during video. Third is the rear of the lens is sealed with a piece of glass. This makes it much more resistant to dust getting into the lens from the mount end.

As for IQ, I find it to be excellent for a kit lens. I expected to use it mostly for video but actually use it for stills shooting when I just want to take one lens to have the smallest, lightest package to carry around. It is tack sharp and delivers very good color and contrast. Also, I haven't missed the half stop on the wide end at all.

Thanks Mike. Your report is very valuable to me, especially the part about it being tack sharp. Do you find it tack sharp other than in the center?

MikeJ9116 wrote:

Thanks Mike. Your report is very valuable to me, especially the part about it being tack sharp. Do you find it tack sharp other than in the center?

Below are some photos I have posted here recently. Click on Original View to get the best quality to see the IQ.

Thanks again. I agree those are tack sharp. I hope my copy and T7i are as good.

seri_art wrote:

MikeJ9116 wrote:

Thanks Mike. Your report is very valuable to me, especially the part about it being tack sharp. Do you find it tack sharp other than in the center?

Below are some photos I have posted here recently. Click on Original View to get the best quality to see the IQ.

Thanks again. I agree those are tack sharp. I hope my copy and T7i are as good.

I'd say hold your horses and please note the target. MikeJ9116 is a fierce SL2 advocate and most probably he's right in all he says about the pair (SL2 plus 18-55 f/4), yet the T7i is a little bit different sory. With f/4 you won't get the same autofocus capabilities as with f/3.5.

This is description for 77D, though looking at T7i's manual this is the same story: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59878727

So there is a tradeoff for having a smaller and lighter lens. This might not be much for some, but there is one.

TxF wrote:

I'd say hold your horses and please note the target. MikeJ9116 is a fierce SL2 advocate and most probably he's right in all he says about the pair (SL2 plus 18-55 f/4), yet the T7i is a little bit different sory. With f/4 you won't get the same autofocus capabilities as with f/3.5.

This is description for 77D, though looking at T7i's manual this is the same story: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59878727

So there is a tradeoff for having a smaller and lighter lens. This might not be much for some, but there is one.

Thanks. I have the T7i manual in PDF form and and it has a full description of what that post said, and it's basically the same as it said. After I get my T7i (now backordered), if the IQ of the f/3.5 lens is as good as the f/4 one, I'll keep the f/3.5 lens.

MikeJ9116 wrote:

seri_art wrote:

I've ordered a T7i with 18-55 STM f/4. I have an 18-55 STM f/3.5 with my 650D. Of course I'll be able to test both lenses, but I'm wondering if there are any good test comparisons. I haven't been able to find any.

I have not used the f/3.5 STM version but do own the f/4.0 lens. While I can't personally compare IQ between them, I do find I prefer the f/4.0 version for three reason not related to IQ. First is the smaller size. It just fits better on the SL2. Second is the zoom action. It zooms in and out directly without the breathing effect of the previous lenses. I find this makes the zoom action smoother. Especially during video. Third is the rear of the lens is sealed with a piece of glass. This makes it much more resistant to dust getting into the lens from the mount end.

As for IQ, I find it to be excellent for a kit lens. I expected to use it mostly for video but actually use it for stills shooting when I just want to take one lens to have the smallest, lightest package to carry around. It is tack sharp and delivers very good color and contrast. Also, I haven't missed the half stop on the wide end at all.

I agree. I just compared my 18-55/4-5.6 STM to my new Sigma 17-50/2.8 and the Canon kit lens was impressively sharp at equivalent focal lengths up to 50mm. At 55mm, the kit lens I have gets noticeably softer across the frame. Naturally, the F/2.8 lens is a bit sharper but more importantly, it offers a wider range of exposure latitude and more DOF control at the cost of increased size and weight. It also expresses itself in a more pleasant color balance, in my very subjective opinion. The images from the better lens just look and "feel" more detailed and energetic. But I digress. I would have no problem at all keeping the kit lens on my SL2 for everyday shooting. It's an amazing lens for the money and it keeps the whole kit nice and light and nimble. Even better, the 24/2.8 really makes the camera portable. Almost like a compact and the image quality is choice.

Just my 2 cents. TY.

The main differences are practical. Besides the focusing differences, the old lens has a substantially higher maximum magnification.  It's actually not bad for macro use, but the new one won't do that.