Canons EFS 18-200 non usm lens

[Marc Pavan]

I'll start this with Happy Holidays.

Now down to business. I have a 30D with the 28-135 f3.5-5.6 USM. I am not entirely satisfied with this lens for several reasons. Thus I am shopping. This current lens is more than a little soft in a few situations. I have good examples of this from my recent trip to Italy. I will post these when I get home from the firehall.

I am considering this 18-200 because of the wider range, but I have seen some comments that it is the new kit lens for the 50D I am hesitant to spend the $800 CDN if I am simply trading kit lenses with the same problems. Anyone have experience with this new lens? I am willing to accept that a wide range zoom like this will not be perfect at anything. THe reviews I have read emphasize the Non-USM auto focus. Are there any concerns with this? THey also mention barrel distortion. I am not 100% clear on what this is. Is that where the edges of the shot kind of bend at wide focal lengths? Please make it simple for me.

A second option is the Tamron 18-270. About $100 cheaper, but there is some room in the budget, this is not a big deal. THe issue here is reported slow auto focus (up to 8 or 9 seconds) and a hard to turn zoom ring. Obviously the extra 70mm of reach would be nice.

Most of my shooting is travel stuff with an emphasis on outdoor portraits of my wife. I am being pressured to gat some good shots of my sister in law's wedding this coming summer too. Planning a month Down Under in 2010, so I want to be set up by that time for sure.

I intend to go to the camera shop when I am off of day shifts and test both of these. Compare sharpness, noise of motors, and AF speed. Anything else. I want to make my test drive well educated.

Ideally I would like a 16-35L and 70-200L but there are some budget constraints, and lens changing issues in the field. This is more of a longe term goal unless these wider range travel type lenses are just not worth it!

[S_Egbert]

Hi Marc,
You may want to check out this stabilized superzoom test by Lightrules.
The Tamron faired quite well. I would consider it for a one-lens solution if I needed it.

[Max@Home]

Originally Posted by Marc Pavan

I have a 30D with the 28-135 f3.5-5.6 USM. I am not entirely satisfied with this lens for several reasons. Thus I am shopping.

I am considering this 18-200 because of the wider range, but I have seen some comments that it is the new kit lens for the 50D I am hesitant to spend the $800 CDN if I am simply trading kit lenses with the same problems. Anyone have experience with this new lens?

...did some testing on a 20D, 40D and 50D, but nothing too 'deep' , for a decent review check here

I am willing to accept that a wide range zoom like this will not be perfect at anything. The reviews I have read emphasize the Non-USM auto focus. Are there any concerns with this?

No, not to my knowledge. It makes a bit more sound than USM, but is fast and from what I have seen pretty decent/accurate

They also mention barrel distortion. I am not 100% clear on what this is. Is that where the edges of the shot kind of bend at wide focal lengths? Please make it simple for me.

...exactly that , also see the example in the review I linked above It can be fixed in Software (PP): even Fully Automatic if you shoot RAW and use Canon's Digital Photo Professional (that came with your camera) ...

A second option is the Tamron 18-270. About $100 cheaper, but there is some room in the budget, this is not a big deal. The issue here is reported slow auto focus (up to 8 or 9 seconds) and a hard to turn zoom ring. Obviously the extra 70mm of reach would be nice.

The 18-270 is F3.5-F6.3, at F6.3 your camera actually doesn't want to AF anymore, as it is beyond it's limit (F5.6), but due to a trick inside the lens it still AF's but slow, and hunting a lot in less than ideal light.

Most of my shooting is travel stuff with an emphasis on outdoor portraits of my wife. I am being pressured to get some good shots of my sister in law's wedding this coming summer too. Planning a month Down Under in 2010, so I want to be set up by that time for sure.

The Canon 18-200IS is a nice General Purpose Travel-lens, if you do not want to change lenses or carry a bag full of glass on your trips. If the wedding thing is mostly outside, this lens could still work at your SiL's wedding, but when you plan to shoot more inside, you might need (a) faster lens(es)...

I intend to go to the camera shop when I am off of day shifts and test both of these. Compare sharpness, noise of motors, and AF speed.

Excellent idea!

Anything else. I want to make my test drive well educated.

you will be testing indoors mostly, I presume: so make sure to shoot both at their longest end and see how the AF fares...

Ideally I would like a 16-35L and 70-200L but there are some budget constraints, and lens changing issues in the field. This is more of a longe term goal unless these wider range travel type lenses are just not worth it!

...the flexibility of wide-range zooms *does* make them worth what you pay for them, as long as you realise (like you do) that that flexibility does come at the price of slightly less Image Quality and a little more distortion at the widest and longest zoom-ends than in more 'traditional' (up to 5x) zoom lenses...

...*my* €0.02...

Kindest regards!

Max@Home

[Marc Pavan]

Wow, great reply. Thank you very much. The test photos in the review are very helpful.

[Marc Pavan]

Here are some examples of the poor and the better work done by the auto focus.
1
f5.6 +0.7ev, 1/6, ISO320 @95mm Best example of the worst images. Early sunset
2
f4.5 -0.3ev, 1/400, ISO320 @60mm Just a little soft. Early sunset
3
f5.6, 1/500, ISO200 @135mm My wife in an olive grove, I am happy with the sharpness. Bright day
4
f5.6, 1/6400, ISO800 @122mm Not my wife! Razor sharp. Bright day

Looking at the metadata I realize that the ISO could have been increased and the aperture moved to f8 for more DOF in the 4th shot. The branches behind us are actually more in focus than we are. Also, mirror lockup was not used.

Thanks for looking.

[Max@Home]

Originally Posted by Marc Pavan

Here are some examples of the poor and the better work done by the auto focus.
1
f5.6 +0.7ev, 1/6, ISO320 @95mm Best example of the worst images. Early sunset
2
f4.5 -0.3ev, 1/400, ISO320 @60mm Just a little soft. Early sunset
3
f5.6, 1/500, ISO200 @135mm My wife in an olive grove, I am happy with the sharpness. Bright day
4
f5.6, 1/6400, ISO800 @122mm Not my wife! Razor sharp. Bright day

Looking at the metadata I realize that the ISO could have been increased and the aperture moved to f8 for more DOF in the 4th shot. The branches behind us are actually more in focus than we are. Also, mirror lockup was not used.

Marc, the 28-135 is a fine piece of equipment, but - as you found out - it is not the best/sharpest wide open (which seems to be the case with many of these images)

Although this deepens DoF, this lens is best shot 2/3 - 1 stop closed down: make a F4.5 - F7.1 lens of it (don't shoot it wider open than that) and your images will have increased sharpness, color and contrast

Also: ALWAYS (in- and outside!) use the dedicated hood (Canon EW78BII) , this elder design lens has less sophisticated coatings and is not that flare-redundant as later design lenses.

About the sharpness and the focus issues in the 2nd shot: the AF system is designed to focus on the part of the image closest to camera with the highest contrast. The branches hold a lot more contrast than the two of you

In the last candid Beach shot ISO should have been MUCH lower, Aperture more closed (so a little less fast shutter, but 1/6400 is nt necessary [/quote]

...€0.02, and thanks for the K ...

Kindest regards!

Max@Home

Thanks for looking.

thanks for sharing!

[Marc Pavan]

Max@home,

Thank you very much! I will make sure to keep it to f4.5 and check for the difference. I will shop for that hood as well.

As for the candid at the beach... ...no excuses. Didn't check and reset my ISO from shooting the night before. Just one of a hundred things to remember. How much would you have stopped down the f? I wanted to make sure the background was still blurred. f8?

Thank you again for all the info. I am always willing to hear it.

[Max@Home]

Originally Posted by Marc Pavan

How much would you have stopped down the f? I wanted to make sure the background was still blurred. f8?

...with that lens, at 122mm where f./5.6 is the max aperture, 2/3 closed, so f./7.1, and I would have chosen a focus spot making use of the contrast between her body and her bikini-bottom.

...€0.02...

Kindest regards,

Max@Home