18-200, Silver or Black?

[argusC3]

Hello All:

New a6000 owner here. I'm looking to extend my "reach" with a longer lens and the 18-200 zoom range would fit my needs. But, is the extra cost/weight of the Silver (E 18-200 F3.5-6.3 OSS) lens worth it over the Black (E 18-200 F3.5-6.3 OSS LE) version? Yes, it's only 2 ounces and $50 but it all counts up.

Thanks for your comments/recommendations.

Argus

 

[Leitz]

The older silver version is the better lens.

 

[uhligfd]

Black lenses are the rage of fashion today; they look as "professional" just like urban cowboy gear does for those herding cattle ... a simple myth. .... Black bodies and lenses heat up much more in the sun (think in dunes of the Sahara) than silver ones which reflect sun light rather than absorb it ... Do you prefer to get into your black car after shopping on a sunny day? Do you like to sit on black car seats that were in the sun? Why did you not choose a 'cooler' white or silver car with cooler seats??

So reason should lead us to use and prefer silver lens and camera bodies as well as cars etc ... , but fashion and the wanna-be photographer myth sells us black ones. Have you ever seen the Canon cannons of sports photographers by the sidelines? They are all big and white. Pros know this simple principal of physics, gear lusters and fashionable people don't.

Your choice. If you choose black gear to conform, don't complain that your lens goes beyond infinity; it must allow for excessive heat expansion. Darn that simple physics ...

 

[Joachim Wulfers]

I doubt the OP was interested in the colour but rather the difference between the 18-200 OSS (silver) versus the 18-200 LE (black). By all accounts the OSS is the better lens, but it is less compact. I have been shooting with the OSS version since 2012 and my copy produces sharp photos with good contrast and colours. Most of the photos in my Flickr Albums were shot with that lens. Here is one sample from today.









--
JoWul

Joachim Wulfers

Explore Joachim Wulfers’s 2,024 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

 

[Leitz]

I doubt the OP was interested in the colour but rather the difference between the 18-200 OSS (silver) versus the 18-200 LE (black). By all accounts the OSS is the better lens, but it is less compact. I have been shooting with the OSS version since 2012 and my copy produces sharp photos with good contrast and colours. Most of the photos in my Flickr Albums were shot with that lens. Here is one sample from today.

Could you post a shot @ 200mm? There is the weak point of these multi zooms mostly.

--
Klaas

 

[Joachim Wulfers]

I doubt the OP was interested in the colour but rather the difference between the 18-200 OSS (silver) versus the 18-200 LE (black). By all accounts the OSS is the better lens, but it is less compact. I have been shooting with the OSS version since 2012 and my copy produces sharp photos with good contrast and colours. Most of the photos in my Flickr Albums were shot with that lens. Here is one sample from today.

Could you post a shot @ 200mm? There is the weak point of these multi zooms mostly.

I have not noticed a weakness at the long end of my lens. You can view many photos in my Flickr albums if you want to do some research. However, here you have a few samples at 200 mm. I like the versatility and its very short minimum focal distance as seen with the toad.
























Taken at the wide end 18 mm





I hope this helps and the variety of shots gives you an idea of why this is my preferred traveling lens. If you don't need the 200 mm the "new" 18-135 would be a good alternative.

--
JoWul

Joachim Wulfers

Explore Joachim Wulfers’s 2,024 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

 

[Leitz]

Thanks Joachim, those look great!! The 18-105 F4 G is my walk around lens and I love it, but sometimes I need much more reach. I had looked at the 55-210, but it is very soft at the long end, hence my question.

 

[John Triebe]

I've got the silver variant and love the close-up nature of the lens, which can give 0.35X magnification. The black version cannot match that.

 

[Beaverhelmet]

Hello All:

New a6000 owner here. I'm looking to extend my "reach" with a longer lens and the 18-200 zoom range would fit my needs. But, is the extra cost/weight of the Silver (E 18-200 F3.5-6.3 OSS) lens worth it over the Black (E 18-200 F3.5-6.3 OSS LE) version? Yes, it's only 2 ounces and $50 but it all counts up.

Thanks for your comments/recommendations.

Argus

AFAIK, the black (LE) doesn't support phase detect AF. Suspect that can have a noticeable impact on AF performance on most recent E-mount caleras.

(There is yet another black Sony 18-200, the SELP18200, but that's a rather rare lens. Basically a OG 18-200 with powerzoom and black paintjob.)