Reading mode: Light Dark

18-200mm IS ?

Go to last post
L

Larry Marotta

Member
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Location
US
I was told my posting should be here, so here goes...

I've had a EOS A2 for a long time and a G3 for a few years and am ready to get my first DSLR. I am partial to Canon and if I bought now I'd get the 30D. However, I have hesitated because I see Nikon has an 18-200mm (approx 27-300mm 35mm-equiv) VR zoom and Canon has no answer to that. This would be a perfect lens to cover most of what I need and then I can always rent when I wanted to go wider or more telephoto. Any idea when Canon might come up with an IR lens in that zoom range? I'm almost tempted to go over to the dark side and get the Nikon lens and pair it with either a D80 or D200. Please give me hope that I can stay in the fold.
 
I don't get it. If you are buying your first dSLR and don't have an investment in glass and accessories, why don't you just go with the camera body (Nikon) that works with the lens that you want? Are there other Canon features that you want/need? If not, there is no reason that I can see for you to "stay in the fold."
--
Rick
 
I went for the canon because they are the very best for astronomy, but for the general use, why not go Nikon if their (nice!) 18-200 zoom pleases you?

Make sure that it is available however!

And to be sure, read the tests here:

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/nikkor_18200_3556vr/index.htm

I often thought that nikon has better lenses, but when reading more tests, finally i have the feeling they are rather close, maybe nikon is somewhat better in the wide-end? and Canon better at the long focals?

Good luck.

Tim
richardkra said:
I don't get it. If you are buying your first dSLR and don't have an
investment in glass and accessories, why don't you just go with the
camera body (Nikon) that works with the lens that you want? Are
there other Canon features that you want/need? If not, there is no
reason that I can see for you to "stay in the fold."
--
Rick
Click to expand...
 
Do you want it as a buying option, so that you can pick a body and a lens that suits you? Say, pick either Nikon D50, D80, or D200 and add either the 18-70, 18-135 or 18-200 VR. After that, you new body & lens will stay together forever.

Or, do you want it as a photo taking option, so that you can switch lens as part of your creative process?
If your answer is #1, then these so called "super-zoom" is for you.
My answer is #2. That's why I carry the 10-22, 17-55 and 70-200.
--
Peter Kwok
http://www.pbase.com/peterkwok
 
Peter,

Thanks for responding to my posting. As I originally said, I like the convenience of having a range that starts as wide as 28 and goes out to 300. Then, when I anticipate my needing something wider or longer, I can always rent a lens as long as I go with a Canon or Nikon body.

I fully understand the argument that the greater the range a zoom has to accomplish the poorer the quality. But I also think that there is a value in not carrying around a ton of lenses and having to change them so often. There is also the issue of dust getting onto the imaging chip when the lenses are being changed that is more a problem with digital than it was with film. In the film days it was still a problem, but at least the film moved every time it was advanced to the next frame and so you'd likely only have a frame or two affected before the movement shook the dust out of the way. with digital, once that dust gets on the chip, it's there for a longer time. Perhaps the replacement for the 30D will have the same dust cleaning feature that the new Rebel has.
Again, thanks for your reply.
Larry
 
You should wait for the Sigma's 18-200 OS before changing to Nikon. Three reasons. 1, you already have the Canon 2, Sigma's should be cheaper and 3, finding the Nikon glass is almost impossible

Who cares about Canon if they dont see the relevancy of this lenses?
 
Oops my mistake, you still dont have the Canon, but the other two reasons are still valid ;)

Oh, and I HATE that this forum doesnt allow you to edit your own posts. Funny thing is that I ranted about and was punished by happy forum users.
 
Larry Marotta wrote:
There is also the issue of dust getting
Larry Marotta said:
onto the imaging chip when the lenses are being changed that is
more a problem with digital than it was with film. In the film
days it was still a problem, but at least the film moved every time
it was advanced to the next frame and so you'd likely only have a
frame or two affected before the movement shook the dust out of the
way. with digital, once that dust gets on the chip, it's there for
a longer time. Perhaps the replacement for the 30D will have the
same dust cleaning feature that the new Rebel has.
Again, thanks for your reply.
Larry
Click to expand...
Been shooting DSLR 4 years, change lenses frequently. Maybe had 3 specs of dust on my sensor in that time.

--
Some cool cats that can use your help
http://www.wildlife-sanctuary.org

Even if you can't donate, please help spread the word.
 
Larry Marotta said:
I fully understand the argument that the greater the range a zoom
has to accomplish the poorer the quality. But I also think that
there is a value in not carrying around a ton of lenses and having
to change them so often. There is also the issue of dust
Click to expand...
That would drive me insane, using a very mediocre over-priced 18-200vr for convenience and knowing I have much better optics at home. The 18-200 is a jack of all trades and master of nothing imo. Using a DSLR with different lenses and trying to be creative is a lot of fun. Deciding a camera system around a single over rated consumer lens is not a wise decision imo. Slow down and stop worrying about dust

Regards
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D200 D50
Sigma 10-20 EX
Nikon 17-35 2.8
Nikon 28-70 2.8
Nikon 70-200vr
Nikon 300 F4 AFS
Nikon 35 1.4 AI-S
Nikon 50 1.4
Nikon Micro 60 2.8
Nikon TC 1.7 II, MC-36, SB-800
Gitzo 1340 / Kirk BH1
Feisol 1471 MP / Manfrotto 3232 - kirk QR
 
PhotoPhilDe said:
The Nikon lens is tested here:
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/nikkor_18200_3556vr/index.htm
It seems to be an interresting len, but a bit expensive for it's quality.
Click to expand...
From the reports, the Nikkor's optical quality would seem to be considerably better than the current Sigma offering. The Sigma seems to have Auto-Focusing problems at the telephoto end. It's only f/6.3 there versus 5.6 for the Nikkor. I would have liked to see Nikkor put a zoom lock on it for that price. At least Sigma did that. The Sigma non OS is considerably cheaper. It is going for $379 at B&H versus $750 for the Nikkor.
PhotoPhilDe said:
Sigma comes now with the OS (optical stabilizer) version of this 18-200 > very soon.



However, there is no test yet.
Click to expand...
It doesn't seem to be in the stores yet. Or is it? I wonder how much it will cost.
PhotoPhilDe said:
Here is the test of its non OS version:
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_18200_3563/index.htm
Click to expand...
 
The Tamron 18-200 was suppose to have better IQ and the new 18-250 is suppose to be even better.
 
Ryan Ly said:
The Tamron 18-200 was suppose to have better IQ and the new 18-250
is suppose to be even better.
Click to expand...
There is a review out there, it performs (at the same range) in the level of the Canon 17-85. Not bad at all. Bob Atkins have the review.

Lets just wait to see what the new Sigma's 18-200 OS can do in terms of optical quality.
 
--
Greg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top