Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 30 Sep 2011 (Friday) 22:10
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3,5-5,6 IS,,, ANY GOOD?

 
sega62
Senior Member
sega62's Avatar
755 posts
Joined Aug 2011
Sep 30, 2011 22:10 |  #1

Sorry to ask about the lens, but I recently brought back my Rebel T3i to best buy and bougt a 60D with the lens that commes stock with it.
And I've been reading harsh critics about it on the net.

So basically, should I sale it while it still in good great shape (brand new) or give it a try.Some reviewed it and gave it real bad reviews.


I would be happy with a 18/135 for a all around lens.I have a 11/16 for wide angle.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
xarqi
Cream of the Crop
xarqi's Avatar
10,435 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Aotearoa/New Zealand
Sep 30, 2011 22:33 |  #2

It's among the better consumer superzooms, with all of the limitations that implies. Try it. Either it'll suit you or not. You should know before it loses much sale value, if any.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Craign
Goldmember
Craign's Avatar
Joined Mar 2010
Kentucky
Sep 30, 2011 23:08 |  #3

xarqi wrote in post #13189847external link
It's among the better consumer superzooms, with all of the limitations that implies. Try it. Either it'll suit you or not. You should know before it loses much sale value, if any.

Yes. It is not a bad lens as some would have you believe. It is not an "L" lens but certainly not bad. There are times I wish there was one in my bag, just not for the price. Try it you might like it for the versatility.


Canon 7D Mark II w/Canon BG-E16 Battery Grip; Canon EOS 50D w/Canon Battery Grip; Canon SL1; Tokina 12mm - 24mm f/4 PRO DX II; Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS; Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS; Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS; Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM; Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS; Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM; Canon Extender EF 1.4x II; Canon Extender EF 2x II; Canon Speedlite 430EX II Flash
Image Editing Okay

LOG IN TO REPLY
uOpt
Goldmember
uOpt's Avatar
2,283 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Boston, MA, USA
Sep 30, 2011 23:29 |  #4

The Canon EF-S 18-200 is surprisingly good. Not at all comparable to the Sigma 18-200 (which is also much cheaper).


My imagine composition sucks. I need a heavier lens.

LOG IN TO REPLY
DC ­ Fan
Cream of the Crop
DC Fan's Avatar
5,871 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Oct 01, 2011 02:34 |  #5

Actual pictures from a Canon 18-200mm image stabilizer lens.

IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE


IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE


IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE


IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE


No complaints about the lens in actual use at real events.



LOG IN TO REPLY
LudwigVB
Senior Member
LudwigVB's Avatar
408 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Sydney, Oz
Oct 01, 2011 03:17 |  #6

It would want to be better! I had the Siggy 18-200 for a while - the non-IS version - and it wasn;t very satisfactory at all.




LOG IN TO REPLY
marcosv
Senior Member
775 posts
Joined Oct 2009
San Jose, CA
Oct 01, 2011 12:09 |  #7

Personally, I think unless you can buy a 17-85 right now to replace it, I would make sure your 18-200 copy is not defective and just stick with it.

You'd be better off learning how to maximize the use of the gear you got. Focus on photography technique and post processing. Learn what you find acceptable via how you use your images --- web? in print? Otherwise, you'll have no bases to determine what is good enough for right now. Otherwise, you'll be stuck pixel peeping and missing out on everything.

The 18-200 itself is a super zoom. That means one lens that you don't have to keep swapping lens or carry two camera bodies. You can shoot a wide setup shot and instantly zoom into very tight. Learn where it isn't at its sharpest and stop down or crop edges accordingly. Learn how to use lens correction in post processing. You bought a 60D; spend your time learning how to get the most out of its extra controls.

If you want to follow what folks say on the web, keep in mind that some of the more popular book writers/seminar presenters, like Scott Kelby, say that they use the 18-200 when on vacation.


EOS-M | 40D | 5DII | 5DIII | EF-M 22 | EF-M 18-55 | 10-22 | 17-55 | 17-40L | 24-70L mk II | 24-105L | 70-200/2.8L IS mk II| 35L | 85L II |35/2 | 40/2.8 pancake | 50/1.8 | 50/1.4 | 100/2 | Rokinon 14/2.8 | 90 EX | 270 EX II | 580 EXII | 600 EX-RT

LOG IN TO REPLY
a_roadbiker
Goldmember
a_roadbiker's Avatar
Joined Apr 2010
Atlanta, GA
Oct 01, 2011 12:25 |  #8

I had that lens and I thought it was a really good lens. I took some fantastic pictures with it, and mine was very sharp. FOr some reason, there are a lot of this lens, but I think it is a good all-around, carry-around lens with a fantastic range. IMHO, the people who are critical of this lens just have not tried it. Plus it works well on the 1.6 crop sensor. The only downside as far as I am concerned is that it had a bit of creep. Otherwise it was great. I only sold it to buy the 24-105L, and even at that I miss the 18mm end of the lens.

Some examples...

IMAGE: http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1157/4621609611_958785fc4c_z.jpg

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4038/4692851885_32638ba80e_z.jpg

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4145/4963127619_c7d6d8d34c_z.jpg

IMAGE: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3509/3790446239_62c0e6cdf6_z.jpg

IMAGE: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3437/5752345907_029f521cac_z.jpg

Have fun with the lens. I think you'll like it.

Jim

Click here to see a list of My Stuff

Visit my flickrexternal link
Like me on Facebookexternal link
www.jmaurophoto.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
a_roadbiker
Goldmember
a_roadbiker's Avatar
Joined Apr 2010
Atlanta, GA
Oct 01, 2011 12:27 |  #9

xarqi wrote in post #13189847external link
It's among the better consumer superzooms, with all of the limitations that implies. Try it. Either it'll suit you or not. You should know before it loses much sale value, if any.

I sold mine after having it for two years for $600 to a very satisfied buyer (via eBay).

Jim


Click here to see a list of My Stuff

Visit my flickrexternal link
Like me on Facebookexternal link
www.jmaurophoto.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
DC ­ Fan
Cream of the Crop
DC Fan's Avatar
5,871 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Oct 02, 2011 23:55 as a reply to a_roadbiker's post |  #10

A few cases where the Canon lens was used at close distances, using available light.

IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE


Focal Length: 18.0mm
Aperture: f/3.5
Exposure Time: 0.033 s (1/30)
ISO equiv: 400
Exposure Bias: none
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: program (Auto)
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No (enforced)
Orientation: Normal
Color Space: sRGB

IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE


Focal Length: 18.0mm
Aperture: f/3.5
Exposure Time: 0.025 s (1/40)
ISO equiv: 640
Exposure Bias: +1.00 EV
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: program (Auto)
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No (enforced)
Orientation: Normal
Color Space: sRGB

IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE


Focal Length: 18.0mm
Aperture: f/3.5
Exposure Time: 0.025 s (1/40)
ISO equiv: 640
Exposure Bias: none
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: program (Auto)
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No (enforced)
Orientation: Normal
Color Space: sRGB

The image stabilization in the Canon lens made it very easy to get these indoor, available light images handheld with slow shutter speeds.



LOG IN TO REPLY
sega62
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
sega62's Avatar
755 posts
Joined Aug 2011
Oct 03, 2011 09:34 |  #11

marcosv wrote in post #13191473external link
Personally, I think unless you can buy a 17-85 right now to replace it, I would make sure your 18-200 copy is not defective and just stick with it.

You'd be better off learning how to maximize the use of the gear you got. Focus on photography technique and post processing. Learn what you find acceptable via how you use your images --- web? in print? Otherwise, you'll have no bases to determine what is good enough for right now. Otherwise, you'll be stuck pixel peeping and missing out on everything.

The 18-200 itself is a super zoom. That means one lens that you don't have to keep swapping lens or carry two camera bodies. You can shoot a wide setup shot and instantly zoom into very tight. Learn where it isn't at its sharpest and stop down or crop edges accordingly. Learn how to use lens correction in post processing. You bought a 60D; spend your time learning how to get the most out of its extra controls.

If you want to follow what folks say on the web, keep in mind that some of the more popular book writers/seminar presenters, like Scott Kelby, say that they use the 18-200 when on vacation.


Thanks I will do just that, i'm getting a book on the 60D to maximize the controls, and about the lens I will try it out, and have fun before selling it, it might be a good lens after all, but some websites had no good reviews about it at all, that is why I was taking some infos!




LOG IN TO REPLY
sega62
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
sega62's Avatar
755 posts
Joined Aug 2011
Oct 03, 2011 09:38 |  #12

a_roadbiker wrote in post #13191521 (external link)
I had that lens and I thought it was a really good lens. I took some fantastic pictures with it, and mine was very sharp. FOr some reason, there are a lot of this lens, but I think it is a good all-around, carry-around lens with a fantastic range. IMHO, the people who are critical of this lens just have not tried it. Plus it works well on the 1.6 crop sensor. The only downside as far as I am concerned is that it had a bit of creep. Otherwise it was great. I only sold it to buy the 24-105L, and even at that I miss the 18mm end of the lens.

Some examples...
QUOTED IMAGE

QUOTED IMAGE

QUOTED IMAGE

QUOTED IMAGE



Have fun with the lens. I think you'll like it.

Jim

Hey Jim, how the hell did you do that, do you have a magic wound?
Did you do any post processing on these or the are the real pure shots?
Do you shoot in RAW???
Any advice are welcome, they are really sharp pics! I love em!




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

1,849 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3,5-5,6 IS,,, ANY GOOD?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00816 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.05s
Latest registered member is chuiyeeho
493 guests, 463 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017