18-200 as travel lens on 7D

I am in the market for a 7D, I travel a lot of backpacking. Is the 18-200 Canon lens a good choice and what can I expect in terms of image quality vs a Mu43 with similar lens I currently have?

Photozone doesn't have much good to say about Canon's 18-200mm. Sigma makes an 18-250mm with OS that I've heard some good things about and it's only $479. May be worth checking out if you're in the market for a one lens solution. Tamron has a a couple good ones in the range as well.

The new Tamron is a pretty compact size, which may be of interest since you will be using it backpacking. These super zooms are a compromise in image quality, anyway, so you may as well get one that is small to fit your application.

why a 7D and not a rebel if it seems like size is an issue?

i'd think the new t4i kit with the new 18-135STM lens could be a good idea...if the optics are as good as the 15-85mm it should be a nice lens

I got one with my 7D body.....anyway I use it for Lanscapes as I use long lenses for most of my shooting
Ive found the 18-200 used around th middle & @ f8/f9/f10/f11 makes a very underrated walkaround n lanscape lens.
Its just fashionable to bash it ,

PhilipAlex wrote in post #14769764
Photozone doesn't have much good to say about Canon's 18-200mm. Sigma makes an 18-250mm with OS that I've heard some good things about and it's only $479. May be worth checking out if you're in the market for a one lens solution. Tamron has a a couple good ones in the range as well.

Photozone.de was much harder on the 18-200 and 18-135 than anyone else. The-digital-picture and slrgear had pretty good reviews on it.

The 18-135 STM seems to be a little bit better - but only played with it a little- -over the original 18-135 IS. Never tried the 18-200- but there is a number of those out there that own it- and like the lens. Lenses are always a compromise- between range, or lack of, aperture, build quality, and price. I'm sure that there may be other criteria for some- but those are the major pieces as I see it.

You should probably peruse the lens sample archive for that lens- and look at them - see if they are satisfactory. Otherwise, buy it, try it, and see if you like it. On POTN, you are likely to find critics for everything, and at the same time, others that like the product. You could also just buy a body- and rent the lens for a few days- to see if that's something you are interested in, or go to a local store and try them out there.

If weight and space are a premium- a T4i and 18-135 would be significantly smaller and lighter- out of curiousity- why the 7D ? Weather resistance ? (weather resistance with a non-weather resistant lens is basically pointless- right ? Besides- Canon voids the warranty if you drop it or get water into the camera or lens. ) get some rain sleeves instead. And some larger zip lock bags.

Yes

A sampling of its flexibility on a 60D


18mm

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Ando27 wrote in post #14770088
I got one with my 7D body.....anyway I use it for Lanscapes as I use long lenses for most of my shooting
Ive found the 18-200 used around th middle & @ f8/f9/f10/f11 makes a very underrated walkaround n lanscape lens.
Its just fashionable to bash it ,

I also have a Canon 18-200mm, and find that its generally much sharper than the Tamron 18-270 PZD, which I also own. Focus is pretty fast, although a bit noisy, on this non-USM lens. IS is very good. There is a lot of barrel and some pincushion distortion. In my opinion the worse thing about it is the very high amounts of chromatic aberration. I'm not sure if the IQ of this lens is better than, or even equal to the basic kit combo of the 18-55mm and 55-250mm. Mine has excessive zoom creep. However, although far from perfect, once you accept its limitations, its a very good and useful walk around lens.

Ando27 wrote in post #14770088
I got one with my 7D body.....anyway I use it for Lanscapes as I use long lenses for most of my shooting
Ive found the 18-200 used around th middle & @ f8/f9/f10/f11 makes a very underrated walkaround n lanscape lens.
Its just fashionable to bash it ,

It has issues, but its very useful. Even wide open its reasonably sharp.

tkbslc wrote in post #14770102
Photozone.de was much harder on the 18-200 and 18-135 than anyone else. The-digital-picture and slrgear had pretty good reviews on it.

The degree of negatively does vary a bit from review to review, but all the reviews seem to pinpoint it limitations accurately.

Canon's 18-200 isn't bad at all.

If you don't need indoors with no flash you can feed a vacation off it.

It is a surprisingly good lens. The distortion on either end is easily corrected in Lightroom.

uOpt wrote in post #14770896
Canon's 18-200 isn't bad at all.

If you don't need indoors with no flash you can feed a vacation off it.

Absolutely. While I think I get much sharper and better IQ from my 15-85mm, and I really like its ability to go wide at 15mm, when I'm out and about I often miss the reach and versatility of the Canon 18-200mm.

Larry Weinman wrote in post #14771837
It is a surprisingly good lens. The distortion on either end is easily corrected in Lightroom.

Generally true, but I find the chromatic aberration is so high that post processing doesn't fix it completely.