Tamron 18-200 mm VC for EOS M??

Hi all,

I am new to this forum but I find it extremely useful!

I am an owner of a EOS M10 and I was checking for buying a zoomlens from Tamron. I just found that the Tamron 18-200 mm VC can be a very good choice. However, I was wondering if the use of ''Di II version + canon mount EF-M adaptor" can be different that the ''Di III'' version which is dedicated for EF-M cameras? I am asking this since the first option can be significantly cheaper (and my budget is quite limited) and also I could still use the lens with other non-mirrorless cameras in the future. Thanks very much in advance! Akis

I have the III version of the Tamron 18-200 for M cameras.  Built like the proverbial tank - a bit larger and heavier than the Canon EF-M 18-150 F3.5-6.3 IS.

I would imagine (somebody correct me if I'm wrong) that the II version, along with the converter, would result in a much larger profile.

IQ-wise, I would say they are about the same.  The M version is a very good all around performer, but like any other super zoom lens that covers both the wide and telephoto end of things, you lose clarity somewhat due to all of that glass.  For example, I can attach the Tamron 18-200 (for EOS M) and take a series of photos of scenics, foliage, trees, grass, or what have you.  I then can attach either a good copy of the Canon EF-M 15-45 or the EF-M 18-55 and capture the same scenes.  The end result is that the images taken with the Tamron have less clarity - details are rounded out (smeared a bit?).  Most obvious is when you look at grass in a yard for example, they are smeared and individuals grass blades are difficult to find, whereas the same scene with the EF-M lenses mentioned above, would net you definitive grass blades.  If this is not important to you, then you'll be quite happy (with the III version).

I used to "swear" by my Tamron - until they lost my original 18-200 which I sent them for a firmware update so it can function with the M5 and above.  It took them a month to replace it, and the end result is that the copy they sent me (even though it was new) is clearly not as sharp as my original one.  I now rarely attach it to any of my M cameras anymore.  I was debating about selling it, but then there will come the time when I will need an all a-rounder for a trip or something, and this one will do the trick.  Now if something better comes out, then I'll sell the Tamron.

Remember, these types of lenses result in severe compromises and are really only good if you need just one lens to cover most focal ranges (less the ideal clarity that you would expect).

Ben Herrmann wrote:

I have the III version of the Tamron 18-200 for M cameras. Built like the proverbial tank - a bit larger and heavier than the Canon EF-M 18-150 F3.5-6.3 IS.

I would imagine (somebody correct me if I'm wrong) that the II version, along with the converter, would result in a much larger profile.

IQ-wise, I would say they are about the same. The M version is a very good all around performer, but like any other super zoom lens that covers both the wide and telephoto end of things, you lose clarity somewhat due to all of that glass. For example, I can attach the Tamron 18-200 (for EOS M) and take a series of photos of scenics, foliage, trees, grass, or what have you. I then can attach either a good copy of the Canon EF-M 15-45 or the EF-M 18-55 and capture the same scenes. The end result is that the images taken with the Tamron have less clarity - details are rounded out (smeared a bit?). Most obvious is when you look at grass in a yard for example, they are smeared and individuals grass blades are difficult to find, whereas the same scene with the EF-M lenses mentioned above, would net you definitive grass blades. If this is not important to you, then you'll be quite happy (with the III version).

I used to "swear" by my Tamron - until they lost my original 18-200 which I sent them for a firmware update so it can function with the M5 and above. It took them a month to replace it, and the end result is that the copy they sent me (even though it was new) is clearly not as sharp as my original one. I now rarely attach it to any of my M cameras anymore. I was debating about selling it, but then there will come the time when I will need an all a-rounder for a trip or something, and this one will do the trick. Now if something better comes out, then I'll sell the Tamron.

Remember, these types of lenses result in severe compromises and are really only good if you need just one lens to cover most focal ranges (less the ideal clarity that you would expect).

Hi Ben, thank you very much for your clear and helpful answer.

I suppose that the problem with the less clarity can be an issue when you use higher focal lengths only right (in this budget range lenses)? Do you have another lens as an alternative then or I could give a chance to that Tamron (maybe my next alternative could be EF-M 18-150 F3.5-6.3 IS that you mentioned)? So far the 'max' focal length I have in my gear is 45mm, that's why I was looking for a zoom lens.

Regards, Akis

...shoot with 4 different brands of mirrorless cameras - those being Micro 4/3 (both Olympus and Panasonic), Fuji X, Canon EOS M, and Samsung NX.

The sharpest "kit style" zoom lens I've ever experienced that punches far above its weight (regardless of brand) costs anywhere from $249 to $299 on eBay (separated from the kit versions) is the awesome Panasonic 12-60 F3.5-5.6 OIS lens (equivalent to a 24-120 MM lens).

Right now I only keep the standard kit lenses (very good copies of them) on my EOS M cameras (15-45 and 18-55).  As I said, the Tamron 18-200 III is one that I would only attach if the ultimate clarity is not an issue - such as a take-anywhere lens.  So the only other lens I use for most scenarios is that Panasonic 12-60 I mentioned above - attached to either a Olympus E-M5 or an E-M10 Mk II.  I wish Canon would make a similar lens to this.  The Panasonic version is weatherproofed, is constructed well, and it's sharpness levels compete with the big boys for 3-4 times less the price of those higher priced models and gives you a 24 - 120 MM equivalent (where you wind up staying a good 95% of the time).  And it has a metal lens mount.  That would be an ideal take-anywhere lens if Canon were to produce something like that.

I didn't care for the Canon EF-M 18-150 F3.5-6.3 IS because it felt cheap to me and I'm not a fan of plastic lens mounts.  That's the big issue right now with Canon - in that they have a miserably small selection of EF-M lenses.  There have actually been more bodies released (beginning with the M) than there are lenses - go figure.

And I sincerely hope that Canon doesn't now put all of their mirrorless eggs into the Full Frame end of things.  I'd be p-i-s-s-e-d to the max if they went balls to the wall with FF mirrorless releases and then started releasing FF lenses to go with them at a rapid rate.

Ben Herrmann wrote:

.

I didn't care for the Canon EF-M 18-150 F3.5-6.3 IS because it felt cheap to me and I'm not a fan of plastic lens mounts. That's the big issue right now with Canon - in that they have a miserably small selection of EF-M lenses. There have actually been more bodies released (beginning with the M) than there are lenses - go figure.

Sincerely,
Bernd ("Ben") Herrmann
Fuquay Varina, North Carolina USA

This is why I am hesitant on getting the 18-150. For a bundled kit lens, fine, I can deal with the plasticky build. The 15-45mm actually does a good job optically from my experience. But it feels like a toy. I would not have paid full price for it. I got that and the M100 new for $350 so I was okay with that; its a good value for sure. The price of the 18-150 with the plasticky build makes me pensive. At least the 22mm has a metal chassis and mount.

I was looking into the Tamron 18-200 but am slightly concerned about if the larger size and weight will mitigate the size advantage of the camera. But then again, options are limited.

I used to have the Tamron 18-200 in EF-M mount and while the build quality is very solid, it wasn't compatible with M50 (giving errors when trying to use narrower aperture and focusing issues) so I returned it and replaced with a 70-300.

I believe getting the Tamron should be a well-thought decision, checking if it work fine first.

...really quick when you have to send that 18-200 to Tamron every time Canon releases a new camera.  That get's so frustrating, and in my case, they lost the lens once (which was actually a great copy), only to eventually (a month later) replace it with a less than ideal copy.  So although I still have the lens, I'm basically done with Tamron.

Ben Herrmann wrote:

...really quick when you have to send that 18-200 to Tamron every time Canon releases a new camera. That get's so frustrating, and in my case, they lost the lens once (which was actually a great copy), only to eventually (a month later) replace it with a less than ideal copy. So although I still have the lens, I'm basically done with Tamron.

It's for that reason I requested a different lens and the store accepted because mine is not working as expected and the update isn't there yet for the M50. In the future, I will avoid third-party lens unless it's a manual lens.

Keep in mind that the Canon EF-M 18-150 lens is also very useful.  And the Canon EF-S 18-135 STM (or USM) are really good on the M Series (via adapter).  Lots of choices.

R2

Well, I eventually bought it. I haven;t used it a lot but so far it works pretty well with the M10 (and the original EOS EF-M adaptor). Also the manual focus is not that bad as some people had some concerns about..Fingers crossed

Which one did you end up getting?

Alan

Alan Sh wrote:

Which one did you end up getting?

Alan

The Tamron 18-200mm DiII version + official Canon EF-M adaptor..

A.

Bendable wrote:

AkisVar wrote:

Alan Sh wrote:

Which one did you end up getting?

Alan

The Tamron 18-200mm DiII version + official Canon EF-M adaptor..

A.

How did it work for you? I've got EOS M6 and interested with the Tamron 18-200mm DiII version + EF-M adaptor setup.

I am happy with it. In the zoom up to approx 120-150mm performs very well, for higher zoom I usually use tripod as expected and the chromatic aberration is higher, but you expect these in that price.. Focus speed is ok for what I am using it for, and quality is pretty good in relative terms. I don't know about EOS M6, but for M10 you need a very good and sturdy tripod as well as mount ring to increase its stability.

Akis