18-200mm lenses

[SrisonS]

Not sure how close you'd wanna get to spending $500, but I bought a 18-135mm for my T1i a few months ago; and I love it. It's going for about $410 on Amazon (that's where I bought mine). I took it on my Disney Cruise back in October, and it was just wonderful. I was never too close for a shot, and it has a great reach. There's a little vignetting in telephoto sometimes; but nothing too major (it actually looks pretty good sometimes). You can look through my Flickr photostream to see samples. All pics on the first 4 pages were taken with that lens.

Here's an example of the zoom range (the weather wasn't great, so don't determine picture quality from these):
18mm


135mm

 

[KarenAylwood]

I love love LOVE my 18-200mm. It was my second lens after the kit (I'm now at 5 lenses and it's still my go to lens most of the time, second maybe to my Sigma 30mm). I'll only be replacing it with the 24-105 f/4.0L. It doesn't have the range, but the quality is amazing on that lens (but you pay for it - $1200). I think for the price, the 18-200mm could be the only lens you need if you don't use your camera much. If you're not looking to get super serious about photography, I'd get the most range I could and the quality is great.

My trip report pictures are a mix of my Sigma 30mm f/1.4 and the Canon 18-200mm (see my signature). The safari pictures are all the 18-200mm.

 

[PhotographyDR]

Even though I am shooting Nikon, I love the 18-200mm lens. I take about 85% of my shots at Disney with it. Even if f-stop is not that great, I still use it for the simple fact that it has a huge range on it without having to change the lens. I think that it is important when learning to not have to switch lenses and carry extra gear. This will keep you interested and wanting to learn. The other lenses will come with time. While I love my 70-200 Tamron, I still did not use it as much because of weight.

 

[disneyboy2003]

We picked up a 2nd hand BNIB 28-135 to use as a walkaround lens for our last Disney trip....I missed having room on the wide end with the 28-135....In hindsight, I'd rather have spent the extra money and went with the 18-200.

I'd agree with C&B Young. There's so much at Disney World that you'll want the wider lens, especially when things are up close and/or you want to capture as much of the scene as you can.

The 18-200mm lens is very versatile and is often very highly recommended as a great travel lens.

 

[jann1033]

We are heading out to Disney at the end of month and I would like to purchase a good walkaround lens. I don't use my camera enough to justify spending any more than around $500. I have the 18-55mm kit lens and the "nifty fifty". I am looking for more zoom. I want a lense that I can also use to take pictures at my sons' outdoor games. I would love the 70-200mm but it's way out of my price range. I'm also very petite and worry about large lenses. Which of these two would you recommend?

Thanks.

which kit lens? the IS or non IS? if it's the IS lens, i'd go with the 55-250 IS or look for a used 70-200 f4L non IS. the l lens is a little heavier but not nearly as heavy as the 2.8 versions. it's more about your arm strength and technique as far as holding it steady...or take a monopod, and you probably would really only use the length a lot at AK so you could leave it in a locker or the room other times. but it's a great lens

if it's the non is kit i'd probably buy the 18-55 IS kit or the tamron 17-50 non IS ( around 450 but a good lens, you might be able to find a decent used one since the IS version just came out) and the 55-250 for about what the 18-200 cost. if you are set on a vacation type lens, probably get the 18-200. if you are willing to keep it around f8 the reviews are pretty good but overall the IQ is only about 8 so not that great. the 28-135 would probably be a little to narrow and really not long enough( and the quality control is all over the place, some are really bad) and the 18-135 is reviewed worse than the 18-200 and imo the 135 wouldn't be long enough for AK( i have the 28-135 and usually wanted wider and longer, it's not a bad walk around length in general but the old is and better options imo are now available )

 

[KarenAylwood]

Even though I am shooting Nikon, I love the 18-200mm lens. I take about 85% of my shots at Disney with it. Even if f-stop is not that great, I still use it for the simple fact that it has a huge range on it without having to change the lens. I think that it is important when learning to not have to switch lenses and carry extra gear. This will keep you interested and wanting to learn. The other lenses will come with time. While I love my 70-200 Tamron, I still did not use it as much because of weight.

I think this is a really really good point. When I was first learning to shoot, the 18-200 was perfect because it allowed me to experiment and find what I liked. Now that I understand about aperture and shutter speed and different types of lenses (prime, ultra wide, etc) I'm much more likely to switch lenses because I know better what I need in a certain situation.

 

[txmom2005]

Thanks everyone for the responses. I think I'm going with the Canon 18-200 for now. Can't wait to use it in a couple of weeks.

 

[Nicole786]

Prepping for disney and thinking of which lens to rent! I only own the Kit 18-55mm but I always rent a lens for trips, which include a fixed 85mm and Ive also rented the Canon L series 24-70mm. I'm looking for something lightweight, but can also produce nice images. Anyone have any suggestions? I've been leaning towards the Canon 18-200mm

 

[VVFF]

Prepping for disney and thinking of which lens to rent! I only own the Kit 18-55mm but I always rent a lens for trips, which include a fixed 85mm and Ive also rented the Canon L series 24-70mm. I'm looking for something lightweight, but can also produce nice images. Anyone have any suggestions? I've been leaning towards the Canon 18-200mm

Basically its a question of do you need the range? I have found that as my photography has gotten "better" I use the longer ranges less and less. In fact, just yesterday I was thinking of what I would use a lens longer than 100mm for and all that came to mind was wildlife or the occasional sports photo, neither of which I do that much.

At disney most of it is wide angle stuff. Sure, I took the occasional telephoto picture at Disney, mainly at animal kingdom or a stage show. However, those aren't the pictures I go back to and look at again and again. I'd just as easily skip those pictures.

If I were you I would rent the Canon 35mm F1.4 Beautiful lens that should let you get some dark ride shots.

 

[Nicole786]

Basically its a question of do you need the range? I have found that as my photography has gotten "better" I use the longer ranges less and less. In fact, just yesterday I was thinking of what I would use a lens longer than 100mm for and all that came to mind was wildlife or the occasional sports photo, neither of which I do that much.

At disney most of it is wide angle stuff. Sure, I took the occasional telephoto picture at Disney, mainly at animal kingdom or a stage show. However, those aren't the pictures I go back to and look at again and again. I'd just as easily skip those pictures.

If I were you I would rent the Canon 35mm F1.4 Beautiful lens that should let you get some dark ride shots.

Just the kind of suggestion I was looking for, thanks for the input!

 

[KramBerries]

Different strokes for different folks. I find myself taking more shots at 200mm than at wider angles when at WDW. I think that's because I've been shooting more people shots that "scenic" shots.

If you want to capture more images of places, by all means go wider. If you want to capture more images of family, friends, performers, details, signs, or other "close-ups", keep something long in your bag.

The 18-200mm is an interesting lens. It's not fast, so it won't be good for dark rides. In terms of image quality, it's OK. A prime (non-zooming) or shorter range zoom will be better optically. The cool thing about the 18-200 is that it is one lens that covers a huge range. That makes it very convenient. I wouldn't use it on a "photo" outing, but it is a great lens when you want to focus on enjoying life but also taking some pictures along the way.

 

[VVFF]

Different strokes for different folks. I find myself taking more shots at 200mm than at wider angles when at WDW. I think that's because I've been shooting more people shots that "scenic" shots.

If you want to capture more images of places, by all means go wider. If you want to capture more images of family, friends, performers, details, signs, or other "close-ups", keep something long in your bag.

The 18-200mm is an interesting lens. It's not fast, so it won't be good for dark rides. In terms of image quality, it's OK. A prime (non-zooming) or shorter range zoom will be better optically. The cool thing about the 18-200 is that it is one lens that covers a huge range. That makes it very convenient. I wouldn't use it on a "photo" outing, but it is a great lens when you want to focus on enjoying life but also taking some pictures along the way.

You make a good point. I'm not a dad so when I go to Disney its me and DF right now. That means the person I am most likely to take pictures of is usually within 2 feet of me! If you are a person that stays off the ride to take pictures of your kids riding dumbo or as I mentioned before really like taking pictures of stage shows and such, then go with the 18-200mm.

As I said before, in my shooting situation I rarely need longer than 100mm. And when I do, I'm not too saddened that I missed the shot as it probably wasn't a "must have" for me.

If you want a more versatile lens I personally would go with the 15-85mm myself. Fantastic lens with less optical compromises of the 18-200mm. Faster focusing, better build and I believe a bit smaller. If I wanted to travel light on vacation I'd probably have that with the 35mm F1.4L. I however, don't mind carrying around the slightly bulky 17-55mm instead of the 15-85mm. All depends on size conscious you are.

 

[KarenAylwood]

I've been a big fan of this lens since I received it for Christmas in '08. It will be my walkaround lens until I get the 24-105 f/4L

It does have aperture limitations, but I have loved the shots I have taken with it. My animal kingdom safari shots in the trip report in my signature were taken with it. And if you look in the fifth post down in this thread: http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=2251797&page=2 I posted some pictures taken with the lens. I haven't been disappointed, and it's incredibly versatile. If you have kids, it's a great lens for people and characters.

 

[bdtracey]

Need some input on which lens to get. Right now I have a Rebel XSi w/ the EF-S 18-55mm kit lens and a 50mm f/1.8. I need something a bit longer. I can get the EF 28-135 used for $300 or I was looking at the other two brand new. The 55-250 is a little closer to my budget than the 18-200. I hate to give up the wide end but the IQ on my kit lens is poor. If I pick up the 55-250 I'm married to the 18-55 for all my wide shots but if I pick up the 18-200 I can shelf the 18-55. If I pick up the 28-135 I will still likely need the 18-55 every now and then but the price is good. I tend to shoot more wide than tele but still need reach every now and then. I'd love to get something that produces better IQ at the wide end and get rid of my kit lens but have the ability to shoot tele as well. Any suggestions?

 

[SrisonS]

Have you looked into the 18-135mm??? That's main lens I use, because I like having the versatility. I have no complaints about it. You can check my Flickr pics for examples of how it handles.

Here's an example of its reach (don't focus too much on picture quality here... we were on a mountain, and it was early morning overcast)

18mm


135mm

 

[KarenAylwood]

I am a HUGE proponent of the 18-200mm. I have the Canon XSi and it was the second lens I got (after the kit). I haven't used my kit since (but I keep it and bring it on trips as a backup because it's small and light and I wouldn't get enough money for it to risk losing it as a backup).

I've had the camera since August 2008 and I have the following lenses (in order of purchase):

Canon 18-55 kit
Canon 18-200mm
Sigma 30mm f/1.4
Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro
Tokina 11-16 f/2.8
Canon 24-105 f/4L

and I still think my 18-200 is one of my favorites. I do love my new 24-105 L series (~$1100) because it's so sharp but I really do miss the range of the 18-200mm when I use it.

If you look at the thread link in my signature all of the safari pics and Fantasmic! pics were taken with the 18-200mm, most taken at 200mm.

 

[bob100]

Need some input on which lens to get. Right now I have a Rebel XSi w/ the EF-S 18-55mm kit lens and a 50mm f/1.8. I need something a bit longer. I can get the EF 28-135 used for $300 or I was looking at the other two brand new. The 55-250 is a little closer to my budget than the 18-200. I hate to give up the wide end but the IQ on my kit lens is poor. If I pick up the 55-250 I'm married to the 18-55 for all my wide shots but if I pick up the 18-200 I can shelf the 18-55. If I pick up the 28-135 I will still likely need the 18-55 every now and then but the price is good. I tend to shoot more wide than tele but still need reach every now and then. I'd love to get something that produces better IQ at the wide end and get rid of my kit lens but have the ability to shoot tele as well. Any suggestions?

actually the Canon 18-55IS is pretty sharp and "IQ" wise it has better image resolution than the 28-135 (see www.photozone.de or
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1

if you need more reach get the Canon 55-250IS - the best option for $200 - $300

 

[Herkemer]

I'm going through a similar decision making process at the moment.

Right now I've got the EF-S 18-55 kit lens and an EF-S 55-250, it was part of a package deal at the end of last year.

After spending a few days out and about (Sea World and other places) I decided I want a walking around lens with a little more range. So off I went scouring various places to see what people thought.

My current options are EF-S 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 IS or go all out and get the EF 24-105 f/4 L.

I've heard good and bad things about the EF-S 18-200, have a friend that has one and he loves it, but others who pan it because it is too soft at either end and it's tendency to move around even when locked down.

To make matters worse, a co-worker has an EF 70-200 f/4 L IS USM lens that he's selling at a great price.

So now I'm leaning towards the EF 24-105 and the EF 70-200 lenses, assuming I can swing the extra cost and get two great L lenses. Then I'll have a decent walking around lens with some range (much better than my EF-S 18-55 kit lense) and still have the option of putting on a telephoto lens that has great quality.

 

[AKVTiger]

I have been researching an All in One option for my 40d. After much consideration I went with the Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD. It is rated just as good if not better than the Canon 18-200mm IS and you get an extra 70mm. Right now they have an $80 mail in rebate which makes it right around $500. UPS should be dropping it off tomorrow. I can’t wait!

 

[VVFF]

actually the Canon 18-55IS is pretty sharp and "IQ" wise it has better image resolution than the 28-135 (see www.photozone.de or
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1

if you need more reach get the Canon 55-250IS - the best option for $200 - $300

I was gonna say the same thing. The IQ on the 18-55 IS is great. You should be getting good results...if you aren't you have other issues.