Hi I own the 18-135 but i have a chance to change it for a 18-200. I would like to know if the 18-200 has less purple fringe than the 18-135 ? (this lens is used only when travel "light" )
I cant find any review about purple fringe 
Thanks.
CyberManiaK Senior Member 673 posts Likes: 1 Joined Jan 2009 Location: So.Cal More info | Mar 14, 2011 13:53 | #1 Hi I own the 18-135 but i have a chance to change it for a 18-200. I would like to know if the 18-200 has less purple fringe than the 18-135 ? (this lens is used only when travel "light" ) Carlos
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Mar 14, 2011 14:04 | #2 I can't say if it has less but.. Chromatic Aberration Not this lens's strongest suit, chromatic aberration is very high at wideangle with strong red/cyan fringing. In the middle of the zoom range (~50mm) CA becomes much better controlled, before rising again sharply towards telephoto; indeed the value of 0.26% in the blue channel at 200mm F11 represents a new record, and forces a recalibration of the scale in our lens review widget. Ouch!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
okcomputer Member 108 posts Joined Jun 2007 Location: Halifax, NS More info | Mar 14, 2011 14:11 | #3 I tried out both and found them to be remarkably similar. I wasn't able to really test them too much, but I've read in reviews that the 18-200 is slightly less sharp - which makes sense with the longer focal length. Canon 5D MKIII + Canon 60D + 16-35 f/4L IS, Σ35 f/1.4 Art, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
LOG IN TO REPLY |
arentol Goldmember 1,305 posts Joined Jun 2009 Location: Seattle WA More info | Mar 14, 2011 14:25 | #4 Photozone seems to think the 18-200 has slightly more CA than the 18-135.... 5D3 | Rokinon 14 f/2.8 | 16-35L II | TS-E 24L | Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | Voigtlander 40 f/2.0 | Σ 50 f/1.4 | MP-E 65 | 70-200 2.8L IS II | Σ 85 f/1.4 | Zeiss 100 f/2 | Σ 120-300 f/2.8 OS | 580 EX II | 430 EX II | Fuji X10 | OM-D E-M5 | http://www.mikehjphoto.com/
LOG IN TO REPLY |
get the 15-85 when you can _______________
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Mar 14, 2011 14:58 | #6 Well thanks everybody.. well tomorrow i will have both lenses, if i don't like the 18-200 i can sell it. Carlos
LOG IN TO REPLY |
LoneRider Goldmember  1,349 posts Joined Jun 2010 Location: Mount Isa, North West Qld More info | Mar 14, 2011 15:33 | #7 CyberManiaK wrote in post #12018300  I would like to know if the 18-200 has less purple fringe than the 18-135 ? Huh... Trevor
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Mar 14, 2011 15:34 | #8 I guess that face is because you don't know what purple fringe is, right ? Carlos
LOG IN TO REPLY |
suhseal Hatchling  9 posts Joined Dec 2010 Location: San Francisco More info | I've played around with both and the lens creep on the 18-200 was horrible, even with the lock on.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
itzcryptic Goldmember 1,174 posts Joined Sep 2006 Location: Cincinnati More info | Mar 14, 2011 17:40 | #10 suhseal wrote in post #12019584 I've played around with both and the lens creep on the 18-200 was horrible, even with the lock on. With the lock on, the 18-200 won't creep at all. It locks it at 18mm though, so it does nothing for the rest of the focal range.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
gkarris Goldmember 1,882 posts Joined Jun 2009 More info | Mar 14, 2011 17:44 | #11 CyberManiaK wrote in post #12018706 Well thanks everybody.. well tomorrow i will have both lenses, if i don't like the 18-200 i can sell it. Just so you know, the 18-200 isn't going for much now as the Tammy 18-270 VC is going for $479 after rebate right now...
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Mar 14, 2011 18:49 | #12 gkarris wrote in post #12019810 Just so you know, the 18-200 isn't going for much now as the Tammy 18-270 VC is going for $479 after rebate right now... Carlos
LOG IN TO REPLY |
aggieoutlaw Senior Member  308 posts Likes: 2 Joined Dec 2007 More info | Mar 16, 2011 19:19 | #13 suhseal wrote in post #12019584 I've played around with both and the lens creep on the 18-200 was horrible, even with the lock on. As mentioned, the lock is just that. When engaged there is NO creep. I agree that when off it is horrible, absolutely the worst thing about the lens. omer wrote in post #12018633 get the 15-85 when you can the IQ is way better between the 2 you've asked keep what you have The IQ should be better. It is several hundred more than the either mentioned lenses and has a fraction of the zoom range. He should get the 17-55 if he wants good IQ. CyberManiaK wrote in post #12018300 Hi I own the 18-135 but i have a chance to change it for a 18-200. I would like to know if the 18-200 has less purple fringe than the 18-135 ? (this lens is used only when travel "light" ) I cant find any review about purple fringe Thanks. I expect that the reason CA is not reviewed is because most users of these lower grade lenses either don't notice, don't know, or don't care. I fall into the last category. If I wanted good optical quality I'd get a more specialized lens. The 18-200 is my "I need a lens but I'm not sure what to bring on this hike" lens.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
mtimber Cream of the Crop  5,011 posts Likes: 2 Joined Mar 2010 Location: Cambs, UK More info | Mar 16, 2011 19:22 | #14 18-200 has incredible range in a lens. "I don't like the direction this thread is going..." (LightRules)
LOG IN TO REPLY |
gary77 Mostly Lurking 12 posts Joined Mar 2011 More info | Mar 17, 2011 11:50 | #15 I've been very pleased with my 18-135. It seems to work great for most situations.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is semonsters 1469 guests, 131 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
