I have replaced the 17-55mm IS with this lens because of its range and decent sharpness for everyday purposes.
On a 50D:
200mm 1/200 sec f/7.1 200 ISO straight from camera
http://i43./1zdq828.jpg
Below are some 100% crops for those interested:
http://i39./2hn6fzm.jpg
http://i44./2d9r9et.jpg
Note that the 50D applies some default noise reduction for jpgs, and the heat waves (look along the aircraft edges) may be the limiting factor with respect to image clarity for this particular shot. Here is a shot converted from RAW with no sharpnening but CA removal applied:
The 100% had a fair bit of sharpening applied in PS (I'm sure many others can do better. Here's 0 sharpening from camera in colour, no noise reduction or CA adjustment:
http://i41./21chv9k.jpg
100% on a 50D is quite harsh and here the lens is obviously not up to it at 100%- but so are many lenses. This example is equivalent to blowing up the original image 4.5 times or so.
As reported elsewhere the 18-200mm IS at 200mm setting is more like 175mm - there is very little increase in apparent focal length when you zoom from 170mm to 200mm.
I must say it's probably not one of the OP's best buying decision. This lens cost around AU$950 - $1050, now Tamron 18-250mm cost around AU$770 and the 18-270mm around AU$1,000.
Hi Ian,
I already have the 70-200mm f/4IS and I have paired that up with the 17-55 in the past. Even though the 55-250 is excellent (almost as good as the 70-300 IS) it is still a two lens system that I don't always want to carry.
I chose the 18-200 over the 17-55 partly because it covers all of my everyday shooting needs (family shots mainly). Also, I have changed the way I approach photography. I found myself always wanting the best possible quality image (sharpness etc) regardless of the situation, at all times. It means I haven't enjoyed photography as much as I would like to, and it also means that I would carry around at least 2 lenses even if it is a simple family outing, just in case one of the shots I get is some kind of award winner that needs to be blown up to 30 inches (it's never happened).
The 18-200 takes me down a peg or two and I am enjoying my everyday shooting more and less concerned with the sharpest I can get for the situation. I am getting shots that I didn't used to get because the range of the lens is so good. I still try to get the most out of the lens I have, but I relax more knowing it's the best it can do. I even shoot the 50D in Medium (8MP) frequetly because the lens doesn't demand a higher pixel count.
That said, if I went on an outing and planned to take some high quality photos (landscapes etc) then I would take more than one lens. I shoot aircraft sometimes and I use the 70-200 f/4L IS for that. Although, the 18-200 is quite acceptable even for that purpose.
The 18-200 is quite good compared to the 17-55 at the wide end. The edges aren't as good and the barrel distortion and CA are worse, but I can shoot in RAW and fix those if I really want to. For my normal print/email sizes, they are almost indistinguishable. Once newer camera bodies are released that do the CA and distortion correction in-camera, this lens may stay on the camera even more. The IS on the 18-200 is better than anything I have used - silent, instant, steady. The focus on the 50D has been quick and accurate.
I do miss 55mm at f/2.8 but the 18-200 can go higher than 55mm. I have had the opportunity to test the 18-200, 17-55IS, 18-55IS and 17-85 IS and the 18-200 came out second to only the 17-55 at all applicable focal lengths and apertures.
BTW n0b0, the net cost of my 18-200 from the 50D kit is even less than your quoted Tamron price, with Aussie Canon warranty. There are definitely alternatives to this lens for it's price if you were going to buy one outright. The 18-55IS and 55-250IS is an excellent kit, and cheaper. You could even throw in a 50mm f/1.8.
The sample pics and crops look allright to me. Nothing spectacular, but nothing really bad either. I am sure these will be nice prints. I guess it must be very convenient to have such an extended range on your 50D.
vontom wrote:
BTW n0b0, the net cost of my 18-200 from the 50D kit is even less than your quoted Tamron price, with Aussie Canon warranty. There are definitely alternatives to this lens for it's price if you were going to buy one outright. The 18-55IS and 55-250IS is an excellent kit, and cheaper. You could even throw in a 50mm f/1.8.
How on earth did you manage that mate? and how much did it actually cost? I looked around and $950 was the cheapest one I could find.
vontom wrote:
Hi Ian,
I already have the 70-200mm f/4IS and I have paired that up with the 17-55 in the past. Even though the 55-250 is excellent (almost as good as the 70-300 IS) it is still a two lens system that I don't always want to carry.
I chose the 18-200 over the 17-55 partly because it covers all of my everyday shooting needs (family shots mainly). Also, I have changed the way I approach photography. I found myself always wanting the best possible quality image (sharpness etc) regardless of the situation, at all times. It means I haven't enjoyed photography as much as I would like to, and it also means that I would carry around at least 2 lenses even if it is a simple family outing, just in case one of the shots I get is some kind of award winner that needs to be blown up to 30 inches (it's never happened).
The 18-200 takes me down a peg or two and I am enjoying my everyday shooting more and less concerned with the sharpest I can get for the situation. I am getting shots that I didn't used to get because the range of the lens is so good. I still try to get the most out of the lens I have, but I relax more knowing it's the best it can do. I even shoot the 50D in Medium (8MP) frequetly because the lens doesn't demand a higher pixel count.
That said, if I went on an outing and planned to take some high quality photos (landscapes etc) then I would take more than one lens. I shoot aircraft sometimes and I use the 70-200 f/4L IS for that. Although, the 18-200 is quite acceptable even for that purpose.
The 18-200 is quite good compared to the 17-55 at the wide end. The edges aren't as good and the barrel distortion and CA are worse, but I can shoot in RAW and fix those if I really want to. For my normal print/email sizes, they are almost indistinguishable. Once newer camera bodies are released that do the CA and distortion correction in-camera, this lens may stay on the camera even more. The IS on the 18-200 is better than anything I have used - silent, instant, steady. The focus on the 50D has been quick and accurate.
I do miss 55mm at f/2.8 but the 18-200 can go higher than 55mm. I have had the opportunity to test the 18-200, 17-55IS, 18-55IS and 17-85 IS and the 18-200 came out second to only the 17-55 at all applicable focal lengths and apertures.
BTW n0b0, the net cost of my 18-200 from the 50D kit is even less than your quoted Tamron price, with Aussie Canon warranty. There are definitely alternatives to this lens for it's price if you were going to buy one outright. The 18-55IS and 55-250IS is an excellent kit, and cheaper. You could even throw in a 50mm f/1.8. ...Show more →
Yeah I can get the 1 lens for all thing for some occasions like family outings and stuff. I just dont think I could give up a quality lens like the 17-55 (i dont own 1). but if its better for you then fine. you could always ty and find a Tamron 17-50 2.8 as well or a couple of primes like 35/2 and 50/1.8.
Personaly I think for the family stuff a good P&S is more than good enough and also tends not to anoy the rest of the family as much.
Ian.Dobinson wrote:
Personaly I think for the family stuff a good P&S is more than good enough and also tends not to anoy the rest of the family as much.
Unless they are of the running and playing kind... like kids and dogs
Yeah I can get the 1 lens for all thing for some occasions like family outings and stuff. I just dont think I could give up a quality lens like the 17-55 (i dont own 1). but if its better for you then fine. you could always ty and find a Tamron 17-50 2.8 as well or a couple of primes like 35/2 and 50/1.8.
I was happy with the 17-55 quality but I found that the quest for quality limited me to just 55mm if I just brought along one lens. Cropping is definitely one solution (especially on 10-15MP you can go quite far) but there's nothing like the range.
I thought about a P&S but they are just too slow in focus and shutter response for small, undrugged kids.
Tail of a Dash 8-400 at 200mm, 1/600 sec, f/7.1, 100 ISO, jpg from camera with contrast only in PS.
http://i39./est2r5.jpg
100% again for those interest (no sharpening, although it handles sharpnening very well)
http://i44./14ctzpw.jpg
