canon 18-200 best decision

AMG wrote in post #10155385
Maybe this thread is getting sidetracked, for now, I am not looking for the argument of why more lenses is better, I need to know which is the best choice for something that does let's say from a range of 20-170. I found the 18-200, I thought 700 would mean it was a pretty good choice but maybe there is something superior at 18-170 for example. hope that clears it up a little. thx

I would likely get the 18-200 IS from Canon if I was going to get an all-in-one zoom:

http://the-digital-picture.com …5-5.6-IS-Lens-Review.aspx

thanks everyone, I will sample it

please also check out the Tamron 18-270mm VC if you indeed need a 1 lens solution...I have one of this and all I can say is its good but haven't used any L lenses yet so don't take my word for it...

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=599376&page=4​5

3rd Party lenses IQ will never match original brand. I say get the 18-200, if you want an all around for a Crop body. Or you can throw down the money for the EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 L IS for $ 2,500! Nothing beatsL series lenses! Then maybe you will catch the bug and continue to upgrade your equipment like me!

Buff_GUY wrote in post #10160284
3rd Party lenses IQ will never match original brand. I say get the 18-200, if you want an all around for a Crop body. Or you can throw down the money for the EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 L IS for $ 2,500! Nothing beatsL series lenses! Then maybe you will catch the bug and continue to upgrade your equipment like me!

I hope you have used both lenses before you made your sweeping statement... I have not used both but I never said tamron was better..I merely said take a look at the tamron, it was worth it for me and for some users in the link I posted

3rd party lenses are not always inferior IMHO...

Buff_GUY wrote in post #10160284
3rd Party lenses IQ will never match original brand. I say get the 18-200, if you want an all around for a Crop body. Or you can throw down the money for the EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 L IS for $ 2,500! Nothing beatsL series lenses! Then maybe you will catch the bug and continue to upgrade your equipment like me!

I can disagree with that, both, Tamron and Sigma make very competent lens in those ranges, Canon seems to be more consistent with build quality and IQ and I think this is where the extra money you pay goes to.

Buff_GUY wrote in post #10160284
3rd Party lenses IQ will never match original brand.

Wrong. Two of my lenses are examples.

Let me chime in
Please read Mr Ziser blog
http://digitalprotalk.​blogspot.com/

He uses his 7D with a 18-200IS many times for his wedding work, you'll find the first pic as a example of that.
I had one and loved that lens, sold it to fund the 15-85 (that i have to say love even more)
Cheers

borism wrote in post #10162961
Let me chime in
Please read Mr Ziser blog
http://digitalprotalk.​blogspot.com/

He uses his 7D with a 18-200IS many times for his wedding work, you'll find the first pic as a example of that.
I had one and loved that lens, sold it to fund the 15-85 (that i have to say love even more)
Cheers

It all goes back to the same old saying, "is not the camera/lens" is the photographer. He's a great photographer, I've taken some of his online courses. Having said that..... none of those pictures have the IQ I expect out of a wedding shot, it's very obvious it lacks luster, detail, etc. ... to me it's a perfect example of why I would not use a zoom lens.

enrigonz wrote in post #10163246
Having said that..... none of those pictures have the IQ I expect out of a wedding shot, it's very obvious it lacks luster, detail, etc. ... to me it's a perfect example of why I would not use a zoom lens.

Those are 34kb 400px wide resizes - of course there is no detail! I would bet he is getting more work than most of us on the forum, so hard to argue with his methods, isn't it?

tkbslc wrote in post #10163404
Those are 34kb 400px wide resizes - of course there is no detail! I would bet he is getting more work than most of us on the forum, so hard to argue with his methods, isn't it?

You're absolutely right, I just wouldn't use them as examples, they look terrible, that's all...............

i think many of those pics taken with the 7D are more casual than the main portraits etc that Mr Ziser takes with his 5DmkII and his 24-105L f4
and there for will be printed on a not so large scale
But either way, the pint is as said on the previous post, Is not the gear, is the photographer.

You know what guys, I will retract my statement and head out to the Camera store and try out the Lenses!

I know it's been beaten to death, but if you want the ultimate in image quality, you don't want a superzoom. There's really no way around it. That being said, Canon's flagship superzoom is the 28-300.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

AMG wrote in post #10155097
what If I am concerned with IQ but still need one lens with a very diverse range

If you change your definition of "very diverse range", then you can find something that will satisfy your IQ needs