Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What's The Best 18-200mm Lens?  
User currently offlinePilotalltheway From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2008, 247 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 14206 times:

Hi Guys,

I am now looking at getting an 18-200mm lens to fit the Canon 1000D/ 450D. Can anyone reccommend the best one for under £200. Pros? Cons?

Cheers,

Alfie


Dude - where's my plane?
19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (5 years 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 14196 times:

None, LOL!

Seriously, 18-200s are best left alone unless you desperately need one - a lens going from ultra-wide-angle through to medium telephoto is never going to give the finest results. Better to opt for a twin-lens combo, e.g. 18-55 kit lens and 55-200 or 70-200/300 (or similar).

Karl


User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 29
Reply 2, posted (5 years 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 14190 times:

Jaktrax is right - an 18-200 is too much of a compromise. Anyway the best 18-200mm (the Nikon) costs more than £200.


Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlinePilotalltheway From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2008, 247 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 14181 times:

Ok,

Ill stick with the Canon 18-55mm and 75-300mm! Big grin



Dude - where's my plane?
User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (5 years 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 14164 times:

Good idea! Not the best lens combo (they're both obviously only budget lenses) but certainly better than an 18-200. Besides, the EF75-300 F4-5.6 USM III (make sure it's that version as the other 75-300s - bar the old IS - are terrible!) tends to be the best performer in its class. Very soft above about 210mm however. Still, more than good enough to get images accepted here.

Karl


User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1745 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (5 years 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 14159 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Actually, I hear the Sigma 18-250 OS is getting some pretty high marks. Yes, it won't beat your 70-200 for image quality but for a travel day lens it would probably work really, really well.

Here's a good review of the Sony mount version: http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2009/0...sigma-18-250mm-f3-5-6-3-dc-os-hsm/

[Edited 2009-09-29 12:35:13]


From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3247 posts, RR: 22
Reply 6, posted (5 years 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 14142 times:



Quoting Dvincent (Reply 5):
Actually, I hear the Sigma 18-250 OS is getting some pretty high marks.

Dan, the long end has real narrow aperture, though (f/6.3). So, here's something I've been meaning to ask for some time: most Canon bodies autofocus up to f/5.6. What happens with zoom lenses that reach f/6.3 (like the Bigma)?

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1745 posts, RR: 11
Reply 7, posted (5 years 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 14140 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting SNATH (Reply 6):
Dan, the long end has real narrow aperture, though (f/6.3). So, here's something I've been meaning to ask for some time: most Canon bodies autofocus up to f/5.6. What happens with zoom lenses that reach f/6.3 (like the Bigma)?

The lens tricks the body into thinking it's f/5.6. At least, that's the explanation I was given for the Bigma.



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (5 years 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 14123 times:



Quoting Dvincent (Reply 5):
Actually, I hear the Sigma 18-250 OS is getting some pretty high marks.

Maybe it is, considering the focal length involved (as well as wide-angle to telephoto), however I just don't trust anything with those focal length figures. There is going to be a best of the worst, and maybe the Sigma version is just that. In respect of my own photography, a 'useful walk-around' lens isn't good enough.

Stick with the twin-lens option - the lens-swapping 'hassle' sure beats a lack in overall quality.

Karl


User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1745 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (5 years 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 14116 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting JakTrax (Reply 8):
Stick with the twin-lens option - the lens-swapping 'hassle' sure beats a lack in overall quality.

Hey, I use a Bigma regularly - if you put enough glass into the problem you'll get decent enough results. You just pay the price in weight and size. The Sigma 18-250 performs better by throwing more glass at the problem. It's bigger and heavier than any of the other ones. The problem with other wide-to-tele superzooms is because there just wasn't enough optics thrown at them to meet a cost. David K's samples seem to be pretty good to me for an average day.

Yeah, you'll be shooting mostly at f/8, but if you're out and about with your kids on a family day, why bother slugging the bag around? The right tool for the job, and all that...



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (5 years 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 14098 times:

Dan,

I see what you're saying. Some 18-200s are going to be better than others but, for example (and being a Canon guy), if Canon did an 18-200 F2.8 L its results wouldn't be as good as the 70-200 F2.8 L. The focal length is convenient but you will inevitably lose quality. The 100-400 L is testimony to this, despite being telephoto - telephoto. Like I said, the Sigma is probably the best of a mediocre bunch - sure, it will give you better results than others in its bracket but better results can be obtained by using a twin-lens combination (in my opinion).

I personally wouldn't go near an 18-200 but each to his own.

Quoting Dvincent (Reply 9):
Hey, I use a Bigma regularly - if you put enough glass into the problem you'll get decent enough results

But more glass costs more money. The OP wants something for under GB£200 (~US$300) - while there aren't too many decent lenses in this price range 18-200s would be well off my list. The Bigma is a different kettle of fish (expensive, telephoto - super-telephoto, etc.) and in all honesty can be pretty soft between 400 and 50mm.

Cheers,

Karl


User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1745 posts, RR: 11
Reply 11, posted (5 years 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 14092 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Absolutely true, Karl ( I use the 500 end more as a spotting scope) but there is something to be said for convenience. I'm not saying it's the world's BEST lens, but I like having options, and to be frank picking up an 18-250 to bring with me on vacation where I don't want to have to drag around a big bag of gear is quite appealing. It also helps that digital lens corrections help pick up a lot of slack for these designs as well.

I might open up a thread about general lens discussion, and what people put into making their bags, as it's probably too divergent from Alfie's original request. Still, Alfie can't go wrong with a decent two lens kit.



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently onlineThomasWarloe From Norway, joined Jul 2008, 265 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (5 years 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 14088 times:

I got a Canon f/4-5.6 55-250 mm. I think it works fine, I guess I'll see if it is that good if I can get any pictures on a.net. I have a pre-screening thread with some pictures if you want to see what the quality of the 55-250 mm is. Good luck,

-Thomas



[Canon EOS 60D + Canon EF 70-200 f/4 L USM Lens + Canon EF 17-40 f/4 L USM Lens]
User currently offlinePilotalltheway From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2008, 247 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (5 years 2 days ago) and read 14067 times:

Hi Guys,

Enjoyed reading this long debate! Big grin

But, I am going to stick with the two lenses. I know there is a bit of hassle, but, a few seconds lost is better than a great photo oppurtunity lost due to the quality.

Thanks to all of you who had you say again!

Cheers,

Alfie



Dude - where's my plane?
User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (5 years 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 14032 times:

Go for it Alfie!

I really see what Dan is getting at but I personally don't mind the inconvenience of carting all my kit around as I only photograph 'planes essentially. I'd rather do the fiddling changing lenses rather than sacrifice quality.

Karl


User currently offlineMonvillez From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 8 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (5 years 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 14017 times:

Hi Alfie,

I think from another thread you were looking at getting the 1000D bundle from Jessops but had some reservations regarding the Tamron lens. I've just noticed that Argos are doing the 1000D bundle with both Canon EF-S 18-55 and Canon EF 75-300 lenses for £500. The lenses are not USM and there is no SD card in with the deal but I'd say it's a slightly better deal than the Jessops bundle although I am am more than happy with mine and the Tamron for now.

Cheers,

Garry


User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (5 years 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 14009 times:

Garry,

That is an excellent price I must admit! The non-USM 75-300s are supposed to be pretty sluggish but optically I would have though they'd be similar to the more expensive USM III. I don't have experience with the lower-end 75-300s so maybe someone who has can chime in?

Karl


User currently offlineIL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2237 posts, RR: 48
Reply 17, posted (5 years 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 13991 times:



Quoting JakTrax (Reply 4):
the EF75-300 F4-5.6 USM III (make sure it's that version as the other 75-300s - bar the old IS - are terrible!)

On which experience is this statement based?  Confused
I have shot with version USM II for years, mostly analog but some digital. Of course it's not the best, but certainly not terrible. Not at all. You just need to correct the chromatic abberation in PS.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Eduard Brantjes



User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (5 years 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 13976 times:



Quoting IL76 (Reply 17):
On which experience is this statement based?

Sorry Eduard, should have been more specific - the USM II has been replaced by the III so I was assuming the former would be out of the question for the OP. I'll re-phrase by saying that other CURRENT versions of the 75-300 are inferior to the Mk.III in terms of AF and build quality, however optically I imagine them all being pretty similar.

Karl


User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 19, posted (5 years 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 13973 times:

Alfie,

Check out www.warehouseexpress.com - they are offering the 1000D + EF-S18-55 + EF75-300 non-USM III for £489.00. Looking at the site it appears that there are now only two production versions of the 75-300 (there were three a few years back) - apparently identical save for one having the USM motor. If the cheaper lens has identical optics it may be worth grabbing this deal.

Karl


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Opinions On What's The Best Crop, Please posted Tue Nov 28 2006 19:46:57 by Stil
What's The Best Beginner Camera? posted Sat Jun 17 2006 04:23:32 by FlyMatt2Bermud
Opinions On Sigma 18-200mm Lens posted Sun Nov 20 2005 00:10:31 by Kukkudrill
What's The Best Seat In A WN 737 For Window Shots? posted Wed May 11 2005 06:59:43 by UA777222
What's The Best Country To Live In As A Spotter? posted Sat Mar 15 2003 22:48:18 by EricBelgium
What's The Best Film? posted Wed Jul 17 2002 11:45:57 by EGFF
What's The Best Film? posted Fri Jun 29 2001 19:06:21 by Vt102
The Best Canon Lens Imho! posted Fri Aug 7 2009 02:22:22 by RootsAir
What Is The Best CRT Monitor To Use posted Mon Aug 11 2008 02:57:01 by JSearle
What Is The Best Spot For Planespotting? posted Wed Feb 20 2008 12:37:24 by B757cp
What's The Best Beginner Camera? posted Sat Jun 17 2006 04:23:32 by FlyMatt2Bermud
Opinions On Sigma 18-200mm Lens posted Sun Nov 20 2005 00:10:31 by Kukkudrill
What's The Best Seat In A WN 737 For Window Shots? posted Wed May 11 2005 06:59:43 by UA777222
What's The Best Country To Live In As A Spotter? posted Sat Mar 15 2003 22:48:18 by EricBelgium
What's The Best Film? posted Wed Jul 17 2002 11:45:57 by EGFF
What's The Best Film? posted Fri Jun 29 2001 19:06:21 by Vt102
Distortion In The Nikon 18-105mm VR Lens posted Mon Nov 30 2009 11:42:45 by Alasdair1982
What's The Best Beginner Camera? posted Sat Jun 17 2006 04:23:32 by FlyMatt2Bermud
Opinions On Sigma 18-200mm Lens posted Sun Nov 20 2005 00:10:31 by Kukkudrill
What's The Best Seat In A WN 737 For Window Shots? posted Wed May 11 2005 06:59:43 by UA777222
What's The Best Country To Live In As A Spotter? posted Sat Mar 15 2003 22:48:18 by EricBelgium
What's The Best Film? posted Wed Jul 17 2002 11:45:57 by EGFF
What's The Best Film? posted Fri Jun 29 2001 19:06:21 by Vt102
Distortion In The Nikon 18-105mm VR Lens posted Mon Nov 30 2009 11:42:45 by Alasdair1982
What's The Best Film? posted Fri Jun 29 2001 19:06:21 by Vt102
Distortion In The Nikon 18-105mm VR Lens posted Mon Nov 30 2009 11:42:45 by Alasdair1982