canon 18-200 best decision

Never mind what on-line reviews say, or what pixel-counting posters on this board say (including me). It's just hot air. Check the images in the lens sample archive - they are worth a thousand words.

MOST IMPORTANT: Find a camera store that lets you try before you buy. Does the lens work for you? If you really hate changing lenses, it might. Is it easy to use? Does it feel good on your camera? Are the pictures it takes sharp? Contrasty? Well exposed? How's the bokeh? If you like the lens and can afford it, buy it. If you don't like it, don't buy it, and keep shopping. The pictures you take are what matter.

Problem with the 18-200 is that it is only 200mm when shooting at infinity. But most people use the 200mm part to shoot portraits which is only truly like a 150mm lens. No one shoots landscape at 200mm FL. So it is only a 18-150ish lens. At this point, it is better to buy the 18-135mm lens and forget about this one.

I have been using a 18-200mm for a few months now and just love it as a walk around lens.
I have used it for airshows, motorcycle racing, animals, landscapes, night photos and people and am very happy with the results and it spends more time attached to my camera than any other lens because of its versitility

darklord700 wrote in post #10603221
Problem with the 18-200 is that it is only 200mm when shooting at infinity. But most people use the 200mm part to shoot portraits which is only truly like a 150mm lens. No one shoots landscape at 200mm FL. So it is only a 18-150ish lens. At this point, it is better to buy the 18-135mm lens and forget about this one.

I have hundreds of photos taken in the upper range of this lens focal ability at airshows and at motorcycle racing and have just checked many of my animal shots and notice that I am also getting close ups in the upper range as well.
I personally looked at the 18-135mm and could not see any advantage in it over the 18-200mm because they are both around the same physical size, same speed and around the same weight and the 200mm just gives more range so worth the extra $s to me.

enrigonz wrote in post #10485193
Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 VC and Canon 55-250mm IS all for about $700 depending on where you shop.

AMG wrote in post #10599541
I am more convinced that a 2 lens solution to cover the range is the smarter decision with some compromise on convenience. But I cannot seem to find an affordable lens to cover then higher focal range of let's say 70-200 ( IS is a must ). The choices for the lower focal range are easier between the canon choices sigma and tamron.

The one someone suggested is 55-250, but my fear is the IQ is no better than my original choice of 18-200.

I would have to say this is the only solution you have to be able to cover that budget

or the canon 70-300mm + Tamron 17-50mm for aroun $950