I'm looking for a lens with good range and good IS to use while snowboarding and mountain biking with my 7D. I'm not going to be printing many of these, but would like IS for video, and this looks like it could fit the bill. Variable aperture is fine for me, but the lack of USM might not be. There are some decent reviews online, but this lens isn't listed in the review section here, but I just want to see what everyone thought about it. Thanks.
I had one for a week and returned it when it wasn't even close to being as sharp as my 50mm f/1.8. If you're not going to be doing any cropping at all, I suppose it'd be a fine lens.
I had one for a little while(1 week), its not a bad lens, it's not a great lens. When I had it, dispite it's lack of USM, it focused damn fast. IS was great and over all I don't think there was much distortion (if any, don't quote me though, I never sat down and shoot brick walls with it). I never did any sharpness test, but it was just fine on my 50D. For what it is, it's great, it's a light small super zoom. If that's what you want give it a go.
I picked one up (Canon 18-200 IS) to use for travel situations where I don't want to bring much gear. As far as IQ goes, it's no prime or L lens. If you're a pixel peeper that looks in the corners at 100% on your monitor, you won't be happy.
That said, IMO it's fine for "non-critical" photography. As mentioned above, despite lacking USM, AF is fairly quick, quiet and accurate. The IS works really well (4 stops) and is also quiet. As you'd expect, there's barrel distortion at the 18mm end, but by 24mm it's gone.
Overall, it's a cool little lens that comes in handy for those situations where convenience is more important than ultimate IQ...
kahren wrote:
the sigma 18-200 OS i think is a better lens
Think I'd rather have a twin lens setup of the 18-55IS and 55-250 IS.
Both lenses are light (combined the same as the efs 18-200 and lighter than the sigma)
The problem with the superzooms is they are not exactly small or light, The sigma is basicly the same weight as the 24-105L which while not unmanageable is still a bit heavy. Also most superzooms dont really get near their quoted MM at anything other than infinity (the canon is reconned to be 180ish).
Also they are not cheap considering the output quality is not that great.
So unless lens changing is going to be a problem or you are constantly going to zooming from short to long I'd think again
You might also want to conceder the 18-135 IS, makes a nice walkabout lens on the 7D without the extreme zoom range (29-216mm equivalent). This lens replaces my 18-55 IS and 55-250 IS lenses for my travel/light weight setup that I was using with my 500D. Both of those lenses performed good on the 500D, the 55-250 was very sharp too!
It's an interesting question, as I sit here with the proverbial 28-135 "kit" lens for the 7D. I am in the enviable situation of having a few other lenses that I can use, but having a "standard" zoom is not a bad option.
I do see a fairly high price for the 18-200, but the 15-85 is also a bit pricey. The 18-135 is unproven, though there seems to be one test out there that doesn't look too good.
In hindsight, I should have kept the 17-55/2.8 but I had no expectation that Canon would again adorn us with a crop camera as fine as the 7D.
the 18-200 is a fine lens. does it have short comings? Yes. so it really does depend on what you want it for.
I use mine as an everyday walkaround lens and for vacations. It is more than capable of stunning images. It helps to shot RAW and apply a bit of vignette correction in RAW conversion.
If you're comparing it to a prime or "L" than it's going to fall short.
But if you prefer to travel light and not have to deal with switching lenses at critical moments, it a fine lens.
2 lenses is not an option for a few reasons. When mountain biking/snowboarding I'm already carrying 100oz of water, food, and riding gear. Space is limited. Second is that I already own L lenses that cover every range I need, I'm just looking for an easier solution.
I think I'll buy a copy and give it a go. I haven't seen any used though, so I might have to take a hit if I don't like it. Thanks for the input.
I had a Tamron 18-250 and was surprised at how well it worked as a walk-around lense. I made some nice 8x10s with it. The only reason I got rid of it, is that I am making the switch to FF.
roberto1979 wrote:
2 lenses is not an option for a few reasons. When mountain biking/snowboarding I'm already carrying 100oz of water, food, and riding gear. Space is limited. Second is that I already own L lenses that cover every range I need, I'm just looking for an easier solution.
I think I'll buy a copy and give it a go. I haven't seen any used though, so I might have to take a hit if I don't like it. Thanks for the input.
Have you looked at the B&S forum. They pop up all the time at excellent prices. or list a WTB ad there.
This site has an in-depth review of image quality (with cropped pics at various focal lengths) of 4 zooms (Canon 18-200, Sigma 18-250, Tamron 18-250 & 18-270):
