Canon ER-S 18-200 mm f3.5-5.6 IS
Oct 24, 2014 00:34:43 #
Has any of you used this lens? If you do what I'd like to find out is: Do you like it weight wise and the results when taking pictures with it?
Oct 24, 2014 05:48:18 #
khm105 - I haven't used the 18-200. I wonder if you've read the digital picture's review on this lens? This guy specializes on Canon equipment and I've found his reviews to be pretty objective when compared with my own experiences on the same equipment: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-18-200mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-Lens-Review.aspx He speaks to the image quality and weight of this model as well as posting a number of sample images when mounted to a body 1 generation older than your T5i. He speaks too to lens creep which is weakness of a number of Canon zoom models. You can use an old LiveStrong band, a strong rubber band or a product called LensBand to stop the creep. I've used on several lenses to stop the creep on otherwise perfect lenses.
Oct 24, 2014 12:49:55 #
Oct 24, 2014 14:43:59 #
mwsilvers
Loc: Central New Jersey
khm105 wrote:
Has any of you used this lens? If you do what I'd like to find out is: Do you like it weight wise and the results when taking pictures with it?
If you are worried about the weight you might want to consider the Tamron 18-270mm PZD or the Sigma 18-250mm, both of which not only have a longer focal length, but are smaller, lighter, have better image quality AND are cheaper. And while every super zoom will eventually suffer from zoom creep, the heavier Canon 18-200 seems to have a greater problem in that regard than its competition.
Oct 25, 2014 07:09:32 #
ken wayne
Loc: Ozarks
Hi Kathy,
I have this lens and have to say it's my "Go To Lens"
I find for my type of photography it fits my needs and won't break your pocket book. I hike a lot and shoot waterfalls and landscapes in the Ozarks and find for the money you can't beat the versatility of this lens. I've added close-up filters, and a polarizer to further it's options. My hiking friend was so impressed with my photo's he recently added it to his arsenal. Hope that helps in your decision to purchase one. Happy Shooting.
I have this lens and have to say it's my "Go To Lens"
I find for my type of photography it fits my needs and won't break your pocket book. I hike a lot and shoot waterfalls and landscapes in the Ozarks and find for the money you can't beat the versatility of this lens. I've added close-up filters, and a polarizer to further it's options. My hiking friend was so impressed with my photo's he recently added it to his arsenal. Hope that helps in your decision to purchase one. Happy Shooting.
Oct 25, 2014 09:07:50 #
I have had this lens and it is a super walkaround, carry with you all the time lens. Very good quality results and versatile. You can get one used for $300-350 and you won't be sorry. I also had the 18-135 Canon lens and I preferred the 18-200.
khm105 wrote:
Has any of you used this lens? If you do what I'd like to find out is: Do you like it weight wise and the results when taking pictures with it?
Oct 25, 2014 14:32:33 #
Hi Kathy, I think you are looking for a lens you can be confident, and is light weight enough to become a resident on the mount of your camera. I would discount this particular lens. Although it is Canon, it is not one of their better lenses. You can now get a very good ultra wide to long telephoto from Tamron. I bought the Tamron AF 18-270mm VC PZ lens to reduce my lens weight while on a Cruise through the Med a few years ago. It is light weight, easy to control, has a zoom lock, and is reasonably sharp. Currently the price of the lens is rather cheap, and is available at all the online stores. As with any zoom lens with this range, it does suffer from a lower image quality. But, if you can find the sweet spot on your copy you'll be more than satisfied. I use mine as a vacation lens on my 7D.
B
B
Oct 25, 2014 18:59:48 #
Oh my goodness you are all making a decision very difficult. I've found a Canon for just $43.00 more than the Sigma. I'm not very experienced in photography, just got my camera in May. I've been using the kit lenses that came with my camera and got some real nice pictures. I'm tired of changing the lenses but I don't want to give up quality for convenience.
Oct 25, 2014 19:22:53 #
khm105 wrote:
Has any of you used this lens? If you do what I'd like to find out is: Do you like it weight wise and the results when taking pictures with it?
I have this lens on my 7d all the time. Yes it is a bit heavy and as a result there is lens creep but the rubber band that comes with supermarket veggies solves the problem. The lens has a lock so when you put the camera in the bag creep can't happen. A hint. The lens does not come with a hood and Canon hoods are absurdly expensive. I use a Vello (from B&H) hood which costs about 3 or 4 bucks. I figure I could go through 4 or 5 and sitll pay less than the canon hood.
Oct 25, 2014 22:57:55 #
mwsilvers
Loc: Central New Jersey
khm105 wrote:
Oh my goodness you are all making a decision very difficult. I've found a Canon for just $43.00 more than the Sigma. I'm not very experienced in photography, just got my camera in May. I've been using the kit lenses that came with my camera and got some real nice pictures. I'm tired of changing the lenses but I don't want to give up quality for convenience.
Which Sigma?
Oct 25, 2014 23:49:03 #
Oct 26, 2014 01:02:30 #
mwsilvers
Loc: Central New Jersey
khm105 wrote:
mwsilvers
The 18-250 mm.
The 18-250 mm.
The Sigma 18-250 is a much better lens than the Canon 18-200, and it's lighter. Check out the online reviews of both.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.