Travelin' Bud Loc: New Mexico, Central Ohio & Eastern Kentucky

Anyone have positive experience with this lens?

Canon ef-s 18-200 mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Bud, welcome to the Hog!
I'd just check its review at, "the digital picture". That will tell you anything you want to know about that lens.
Again, welcome and good luck!
SS

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

Yes, I have one. When I bought my 70D a couple years back, the kit lens was the 18-135 but I already had an 18-135 so I ordered it with the 18-200 and saved a couple few hundred dollars off the retail price. It's actually a very nice lens, great image stabilization, fast auto focus and really good image quality. I've shot a lot of video with that lens and it has always done a great job. It's not too big and not too heavy. The one thing I dislike about it is lens creep, which is fairly common. It does have a zoom lock to keep it from zooming out when the lens is pointed down. It would also had been nice if Canon used a USM ring focus motor instead of the micro motor they did use but, the auto focus works well so no big deal.

Travelin' Bud Loc: New Mexico, Central Ohio & Eastern Kentucky

I'm just so freakin' confused (and worried) about what new lens to get. I have no more than $500 and one shot to get it right. My current zoom is the kit lens that came with my T1i (500D); Canon EF 75-300, 1:4-5.6 IV. I do not like it at all.

Have researched and looked into the following;

Canon EF-S 55-250 IS II (or STM)
Canon EF 70-200 IS II USM
Canon EF 70-300 IS USM
Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
Sigma 18-250 OS HSM DC
Sigma 18-300 DC MACRO HSM OS Contemporary
Tamron 16-300 Di II VC PZD

I shoot a lot of different stuff, from junk I find on the ground to birds of prey to sunsets and rainbows. LOL Ya see... not a professional photographer but just like to make nice, crisp photos.

Anyway, that's where I stand and I am thinking right after Christmas, I gotta pull the trigger and just get one!

Roger Lee

I'd keep the kit lens and pick up the 70-300 lens. Not much good has been written about the 75-300 lens especially at the longer focal lengths. Since the 70-300 is being superseded with a Mk II the original might be found rather cheap.

CLF Loc: Raleigh, NC

Bud, I own the Sigma 18-250mm lens and love it. I just posted some photos in the close-up section of this site. The title is "Yates Mill Pond 12-21-2016". It show some landscape and close up photos.

Greg

Chemwood Loc: UK

Best lens in my camera bag is Canon F4 70-200mm L IS. Use it on my 650D when travelling with two camera for the extra reach, but also on my 6D if walkabout. Pin sharp, light weigh,full range internal focusing - ergo no lens creep. Pick a good secondhand one on eBay.

heyjoe Loc: cincinnati ohio

if you shop around you can find a nice used L lens for the $500 budget,you should try an L lens ,they are fast focus,
and very sharp,the kit would be a good start(think 24-105 ?)

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

Check out Canon Rumors. A bunch of heavily discounted refurb lenses if you move fast.

The 70-300 IS USM is a good lens at that price....

Good luck

MikeMck Loc: Southern Maryland on the Bay

I have it. Bought it refurbished from the Canon website. It is sharp. It is developing a bit of a creep, but I control that with a "lens band". Certainly worth the money.

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

I presume you want a walk-around lens. I am a big fan of such lenses because of the convenience. If this is the case, then I would definitely buy it or consider one of the new 18-300 models. I am currently evaluating the Canon with the new Sigma lens. My first round of tests indicate the Canon to be very slightly sharper with the test target. However, the "real world" comparison will be the final arbiter for me and I will then sell one or the other.

Be careful about considering more expensive lenses that are either faster or have less zoom. If you compare the lenses carefully, you might be surprised how nice the modest Canon is.

ballsafire Loc: Lafayette, Louisiana

Any way-- I'd order a 50mm f/1.8 lens.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

I have the Canon 70-300 (not MK II) and Sigma 18-250 (the ones to 300 weren't available back when I got it. The Sigma is always on the camera when not in use so it is available for whatever. It serves as the walk about lens, good for portraits and landscapes as well as birds. The Canon didn't give me better long shots. I expect the Canon 18-200 to be slightly sharper, but it boils down to your needs. For my use (mostly music performances from the audience) the longer reach vs the 200 was important.

Retired fat guy with a camera Loc: Colorado

Heyjoe, has it right. buy a used L lens. Look for one on craigslist. You can fine a 24-105 mm l or a 70-200 mm l for the money you have to spend. It is your best bang for your buck

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

The Canon 18-200 is a decent enough lens in the genre, but it's no superstar. It WILL develop a lot of lens creep over time which will affect the zoom setting when shooting upwards or downwards at more than a 45 degree angle. It does have a lock at 18mm to prevent the lens from extending while you're carrying it. It is fairly sharp in the center of the lens and less so at the edges. Both the sharpness and lens creep are general issues on all superzooms. The Canon is an old model, but it does have 4 stops of image stabilization. However, it uses a noisy auto focus micro motor and is a bit slower to focus when compared to lenses with faster and newer designed motors. This lens also had some perculiar wide end distortion which is noticable when taking photos of architecture. The lens also suffers from a high degree of chromatic aberration, which depending on lighting and contast, shows up as thin red or purple edges on things like branches or edges delineating two surfaces. While it's possible these issues, which are fairly subtle for the average shooter, may not bother you, you should be aware of them. I think you may be better served with a choice from Tamron and Sigma. While I have no personal experience with it, the Tamron 16-300 is said to be a good lens and has a very useful focal range. The difference between 16 and 18 mm on the wide end may seem small, but in fact 16mm will give you a fairly significant and very noticably wider image than 18mm.

Keep in mind the only benefit of superzooms, including the one you're asking about, is purely the convenience factor. It's very difficult to design a lens with a large focal range to be uniformly excellent throughout the zoom range. Today's crop of Canon's 18-55mm and 55-250 mm kit lenses will give you somewhat better results but will not be as convenient to use. It's not surprising you're unhappy with your 75-300. It's generally considered a poor lens.