Canon 18-200mm or what lens?

[Carole]

Hi there,
I have a 450D and currently take most shots with my kit lens and the Canon 85mm prime. The prime is excellent and extremely sharp, which I use mostly for portraits (now and again for some landscape and sports shots). I am selling my 400mm 5.6 prime in classifieds (an outstanding lens!), but at this stage I am a little fed up with changing lenses and am looking for something like the 18-200mm Canon lens, but have absolutely no idea what it is like for sharpness. Basically what I want is a lens that remains on the camera at all times and is versatile for most shots, fairly close up, landscape, some sports, but has the sharpness of my 85mm. Any recommendations?

Many thanks.

Carole

[bomtek]

I think you're asking a bit much. Not many zooms are going to give you the sharpness of a prime.

The 18-200 is an OK walk around lens but nothing close to your 85 and certainly not close to your 400 5.6

Have you considered the 70-200 series?


On a side note, your 400 5.6 is over priced - a new one costs R13k
Second hand they're going for between 9 and 10k

[Carole]

Thank you so much for advising on the 400mm prime. Sandton were selling for R16,500 so I took it from there. Many thanks though....I do appreciate your help. Will be bringing down the price.

Thank you too for letting me know that I probably am asking for too much with regard to the lens. I would like something with a wider angle - hence the 18mm so probably the 70-200 wouldn't suit.

Many thanks.

Carole

[sterretje]

I seem to have read somewhere that there is a L glass super zoom (28 to 300 or so) and if I recall correctly it's quite good. It's probably the closest to what you want; maybe not price wise.

Ah, found it:
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consum..._5_5_6l_is_usm and ODP has it for a little below ZAR 26000: http://www.outdoorphotoshop.co.za/Pr...tid=9322A006AA

Combine it with an UWA or standard zoom and lens swapping will be limited.

[Thndr_strck]

My little Tokina is doing well so far, not an L lens, but nice wide focal coverage :P

[BrerFox]

Carole, my wife loves her 18-200 more than any other lens we own. Nothing touches it for weight and versatility.
Quality is not bad at all, but everyone has a different standard for quality. I far prefer the 17-85 lens to the 18-200.
We have owned the 18-135, which fits between the other two, but the 18-200 is more versatile. If you are happy with your kit
lens, you will probably be happy with the 18-200.
I owned the 28-350 zoom, but it is far from being a walk-about lens. It is heavy and bulky. I traded it for the 70-300 DO,
which I absolutely love. The DO is a highly controversial lens and many people feel that for about the same price, the excellent 70-300L
is a better bet. The L is indeed an excellent lens, but I use the DO much more, because of its walkabout convenience.
Of all these lenses, the 18-200 is by far the flimsiest. But, that is the price you pay for light and convenient. We have owned ours
for about 5 years and must have taken 200'000 shots with it and it still works perfectly. But, I would not like to drop it.
Each person has different criteria for a lens, but, for convenience and versatility, the 18-200 and 70-300 DO are very hard to beat,
especially if weight is a significant factor.

[camerasaurusrex]

I agree with the others that you are asking for a non-existent lens. I have yet to find prime lens quality in a zoom. You have to compromise somewhere, whether it be inconvenience in changing lenses, the sheer weight of a wide range L zoom, price and image quality. You have to decide for yourself what you want to compromise on. Where you will benefit from the advice of the forumites, is that if you pick a bunch of lenses in a similar catagory, they will be able to advise which of those are the lemons to avoid.

[Carole]

Thank you all so much for your input. I really do appreciate it. I am leaning towards the 10-22mm for wide angle shots. I believe this is a great lens for clarity. However, the 28-300 sounds really good, and I will take a further look into this as well.

Many thanks.

[Leo Theron]

The lens you are looking for, is yet to be made… so, we know that all lenses are compromises, and with that in mind we make our choices.

Before I continue - DO NOT SELL YOUR 400/5.6. You WILL regret it at a later stage.

The benefit that is least understood by beginners is the benefit of a wide aperture lens. Wide aperture lenses are difficult to manufacture, expensive to buy and difficult to cart around. They are bought because they produce very specific results - and that is why people buy them - otherwise we all would have been shooting with 18-500 f8 lenses!

Your shooting style will dictate what you buy. And here Terry is trying to tell you that a 70-200 will be a good match for what you already have. And Yes - the 28-300 SOUND like a good solution, but the 28 side on YOUR camera is only the view of a 'normal' lens - so you will swap lenses more often under general shooting conditions.

Personally I use zooms and primes. Primes provide that difficult-to-match quality while zooms provide versatility.

[Carole]

Thank you once again for your input.........after each message I do more research. Also now understanding the difference in a crop and full frame camera.

Leo what do you think of the 10-22 for wide angle shots? Could you also let me know which lens you use for your 'zooms' ?

Many thanks.

I have taken on board regarding your advice about not selling my 400 prime but I really don't use it any more. My 85mm however is a lens I will never part with. When I crop in LR - my subject (whatever that might be and whatever distance) is amazing - clarity excellent.

Carole

[Leo Theron]

The Canon 10-22 is in the same class as the Nikon 10-24 (I used it's predecessor, Nikon 12-24/f4 on my D2Xs before) - for use on a crop frame camera.

My Zooms? On a full frame Nikon: 16-35/4 and 70-200/2.8. And I use a 50/1.4, 60/2.8 Micro and 300/f4.

You have the experience with your 85/1.4 providing you with excellent images. That is why I suggested you keep your 400 - as it is a legendary prime lens.

On the prime lens front: On a Micro 4/3 (M43) camera I have a 20/1.7 (40mm FF equivalent) and a 45/1.8 (90mm FF equivalent). These primes are good - but the real benefit is the wide apertures and that is why I have them.

Cropping? Come-on - move closer!

Happy Shooting

[Carole]

Leo thank you once again. I will take an in depth look a little later on at your message.

You will be pleased to know that I have taken out my 400 prime and started using it this morning - children - birds - garden - scenery etc (we have a 3/4 acre garden). I had forgotten how great this lens is, and so, for now at least, I have decided to keep it.


Thankyou !!

Carole

[camerasaurusrex]

Glad you are not going to sell the 400. Three things about that lens. Shoot above 1/500sec. Shoot at f/8, and keep it still, dead still, and you will be amazed by the results!!!

[FDavel]

Carole have you considered the 24-105 L as a walk-around lens? The 24-105 will work for all except wide angle landscapes and some field sports. You said it yourself, you are keeping the 400 (field based sports) and you should get a 10-22 for the landscapes. Go to a shop and try on some lenses if they allow it, go and get a good feel for the lens you want to buy. I am new to the world of DSLR but this is how I go about choosing a lens after I am happy with what I have read in reviews on the internet.

[koosdup]

What about the 17-55f2.8? I think it will be a great combo with your 85 prime.

[Carole]

Carole have you considered the 24-105 L as a walk-around lens? The 24-105 will work for all except wide angle landscapes and some field sports. You said it yourself, you are keeping the 400 (field based sports) and you should get a 10-22 for the landscapes. Go to a shop and try on some lenses if they allow it, go and get a good feel for the lens you want to buy. I am new to the world of DSLR but this is how I go about choosing a lens after I am happy with what I have read in reviews on the internet.

I have considered the above lens, and may just give it a try out soon. Maybe hire it from ODP.

Many thanks

Carole

[Carole]

What about the 17-55f2.8? I think it will be a great combo with your 85 prime.

I have been doing quite a bit of research and looking at reviews. This lens seems really nice. I took a look at comparison photos between the 18-55 kit lens and the 17-55mm - and the 17-55mm definitely looked a whole lot sharper and cleaner. I think maybe the 24-105mm might be a better bet for the zoom.

[Henk Coetzee]

I have been doing quite a bit of research and looking at reviews. This lens seems really nice. I took a look at comparison photos between the 18-55 kit lens and the 17-55mm - and the 17-55mm definitely looked a whole lot sharper and cleaner. I think maybe the 24-105mm might be a better bet for the zoom.

Depends on what you want/need. Earlier you said:

I am a little fed up with changing lenses

Bear in mind that on a crop body 24mm is not particularly wide and you may still need to change lenses a bit.

[Leo Theron]

With Henk on the 24-105 issue…

Quality wise the 17-55 and the 24-105 are birds of-a-feather sharpness wise. But the 17-55 wins with a f-stop. And that is really important. NOTHING COMES TO MORE LIGHT - NOTHING!!!

For general use, the 17-55 gets my vote. Why? Not because it so so good, but because it is such a useful FL-range. And that is what is more important - the view provided by the lens. OK, and back to the previous paragraph - that extra STOP!!

It is good to remember that as the sensor gets smaller, every mm (millimeter) or lack there-off on the wider part, is important.

You want to know what it looks like? Take a piece of gaffer tape and tape your kit lens to 24mm - that is exactly the widest view of the 24-105 lens!

[Carole]

Leo, many thanks. I have been doing that although not with tape............I watched Cameralabs demonstrating this lens and on a crop body I am looking at 38mm. A bit of a drawback, but then I would be gaining on the zoom.

The 17-55mm seems good, but not enough zoom.

I may have to still look at selling the 400mm which I am enjoying once again, because of silly issues like shoulder/neck spasms from its being heavy!! It's NOT the carrying of the lens at all. The problems come when I take photos, which cause the muscle spasms to go on for days!!! Probably not a man-issue but definitely a biggie for me. : - ((

Carole