Canon 18-200 review posted......

http://www.slrgear.com …t.php/product/1​219/cat/11

http://www.photozone.d​e …os/400-canon_18200_3556is

Photozone doesn't like it

http://www.dpreview.co​m …0%5F3p5%2D5p6%5​Fis%5Fc16/

thats a shame. odd too, since canon had a couple of years to study the designs of nikon, sigma and tamron versions of this lens, yet couldnt match any of them in combination of optics and features.

playing with this lens at a store recently, i actually thought it handled very well despite not having USM. AF was very fast indeed, but i guess that was because of the 50D.

i took some raw shots, and only recently were able to open them when ACR updated to 4.6. my conclusions parallel photozone's: very soft edges at most focal lengths. the distortion didnt really bother me, since i understand that this is a 11x zoom. but the softness is a bit much to take for this price range. its a shame, i was anticipating that canon would have a great all-in-one travel lens for us...

I wanted this lens to be a winner but it's not. Not if your looking for some quality images. I'm sure it's ok to go on vacation and take pics of your kids and stuff. It will be more than ok for that but not if your serious about your photography.

Now, let's wait for the Tamron 18-270 ...

sbbruin wrote in post #6536380
thats a shame. odd too, since canon had a couple of years to study the designs of nikon, sigma and tamron versions of this lens, yet couldnt match any of them in combination of optics and features.

On the contrary, the EF-S 18-200 IS has proved to be optically superior to its Nikon, Sigma, and Tamron counterparts. The tests at slrgear, dpreview, and photozone shows this.

But as Klaus wrote in his Photozone review: "The situation would have been different a couple of years ago when the sensor requirements were lower but combined with the EOS 50D the lens is somewhat outdated straight from the start. Better look elsewhere unless you still intend to use an older generation DSLR for a while."

Had the lens been tested on an 8 MP sensor, its MTF chart would completely blow the Nikkor, Tamron, and Sigma out of the water. I've tried resizing Photozone's 15 MP samples from the lens down to 8 MP, and they look better than the samples from the other lenses.

The EF-S 18-200 IS is not a good lens for the EOS 50D. But I think the lens would be great for people with EOS 40D, 1000D, or earlier models.

Strawberry Fields wrote in post #6537226
The EF-S 18-200 IS is not a good lens for the EOS 50D. But I think the lens would be great for people with EOS 40D, 1000D, or earlier models.

acutally, youre right! i just checked the slrgear review and noticed that on the 20D, the lens does fairly well. i had no idea that pixel density would affect the optical performance of a lens THAT much!

still, im wondering what canon was thinking when it releases and packages a lens with the 50D when it was optimally designed for the 20/30/40D. i really doubt that any new canon slr will have less than 15mp now, so their design choice is very curious. im now wondering whether other lenses that were optically just okay on those less dense sensors will be terrible on the newer sensors. it looks like canon may have to revamp their entire lineup, from consumer to L lenses, if the slrgear and photozone tests are any indicator.

Strawberry Fields wrote in post #6537226
On the contrary, the EF-S 18-200 IS has proved to be optically superior to its Nikon, Sigma, and Tamron counterparts. The tests at slrgear, dpreview, and photozone shows this.

But as Klaus wrote in his Photozone review: "The situation would have been different a couple of years ago when the sensor requirements were lower but combined with the EOS 50D the lens is somewhat outdated straight from the start. Better look elsewhere unless you still intend to use an older generation DSLR for a while."

Had the lens been tested on an 8 MP sensor, its MTF chart would completely blow the Nikkor, Tamron, and Sigma out of the water. I've tried resizing Photozone's 15 MP samples from the lens down to 8 MP, and they look better than the samples from the other lenses.

The EF-S 18-200 IS is not a good lens for the EOS 50D. But I think the lens would be great for people with EOS 40D, 1000D, or earlier models.

sbbruin wrote in post #6537758
acutally, youre right! i just checked the slrgear review and noticed that on the 20D, the lens does fairly well. i had no idea that pixel density would affect the optical performance of a lens THAT much!

still, im wondering what canon was thinking when it releases and packages a lens with the 50D when it was optimally designed for the 20/30/40D. i really doubt that any new canon slr will have less than 15mp now, so their design choice is very curious. im now wondering whether other lenses that were optically just okay on those less dense sensors will be terrible on the newer sensors. it looks like canon may have to revamp their entire lineup, from consumer to L lenses, if the slrgear and photozone tests are any indicator.

I'm not really surprised at this, I'd imagine that a number of Canon consumer lenses will have less than stellar results when 50D images are viewed at 100%. The resolution of the 50D pushes toward the resolving ability limits of our better lenses.

The 18-200 is liable to have some degree of lesser IQ due to the extreme zoom factor. It looks like if you shoot in sRAW you might get decent results, though. Or, just don't plan on cropping or printing to the full resolution with this lens.

tonylong wrote in post #6537794
I'm not really surprised at this, I'd imagine that a number of Canon consumer lenses will have less than stellar results when 50D images are viewed at 100%. The resolution of the 50D pushes toward the resolving ability limits of our better lenses.

The 18-200 is liable to have some degree of lesser IQ due to the extreme zoom factor. It looks like if you shoot in sRAW you might get decent results, though. Or, just don't plan on cropping or printing to the full resolution with this lens.

this is why my 1 dsmk2 will be my main camera for a while. My 70-200 and 85 1.2 are incredibly sharp with that body. When ISO is at 4,000,000 then I'll probably replace it.

Statistics can make or break any argument/opinion. There's certainly a place for them and they go a long way to making decisions there's no question, but consideration also needs to be paid to the intangible stuff like who the target market is, who would ultimately use a lens like this and what the lens would be used for.

I am new to DSLR photography and recently purchased the 450D/XSi camera with this lens in the kit. As an amateur consumer level photographer I have been extremely happy with the PQ and all round versatility of this lens.

Sure it's not the best one on the market, but nor do I need that for what I use it for. As a new person to DSLR, I was after a reasonably good quality kit that didn't break the bank, that was easy to use (for both myself and my wife) and provided great photos, which mine certainly does. Should I want to invest further in my hobby and take it to the next level at some stage, I'd certainly look at upgrading my lenses (I have the nifty fifty 50mm f/1.8 too), but I'd also look at investing in a new body like a 50D as well. I would see that as a progression to an entirely different level of photography than where I'm currently at.

It is a little peculiar that this lens comes with a 50D in a kit given the target market, but in my opinion, it sits quite nicely with the 450D kit and older bodies in terms of price and level of consumer experience at the lower DSLR end.

We now have a great DSLR combo that on most occasions we can simply pack and take one body and one lens to shoot a very wide range of pictures with outstanding results – at least that’s the opinion of an amateur on this sort of stuff!

Considering how well ( ) canon made the 17-85 I am not suprised by this. What does suprise me is on Dpreview after comments like "worst we have ever seen" and "new record for distortion" they recommend it!!

Neilyb wrote in post #6539436
Considering how well ( ) canon made the 17-85 I am not suprised by this. What does suprise me is on Dpreview after comments like "worst we have ever seen" and "new record for distortion" they recommend it!!

Thats why I'm not buying it. It's no better and may be worse than the 17-85 I have. How they can recommend it is beyond me. Thats pretty funny.

sounds pretty crappy from this statement. plus, the 18-55IS and 55-250IS cover a longer range at roughly half the price.

Anyone thinking about buying this lens should try it out first. I've taken over 200 shots since I got mine about a week ago and I am really impressed by the photos I've gotten. I wanted to get the 55-250mm to supplement my collection but then a new 50D owner offered me his 18-200mm for $500 shipped. The convenience/versatilit​y of this lens is pure joy.