Canon EF 24-105mm f4 L IS USM vs. EF-S 18-200mm f3.5-5.6 IS

[scarll]

I am interested in upgrading my current general purpose lens, a Canon EF 28-105mm f 3.5-4.5II USM lens and have been saving for the EF 24-105mm f4 L IS USM lens at the recommendation of a photographer friend. My current lens takes good pictures, but I would like to have IS. I am not sure I need to go with the "L" glass and have been looking at alternatives. One that I have in mind is the 18-200mm F3.5-5.6 IS lens as some reviewers felt the IQ was comparable. Of course there are also some negative reviews about IQ with the 18-200, and apparent problems with the lens lock. I currently have a Tamron 80-200 lens, which is very heavy and therefore does not get used a lot. I also have a Tokina 19-35mm F3.5-4.5 that takes great pictures, and the kit lens. If I get the Canon 18-200, I could sell the Tamron and Tokina and have one lens to meet my needs. My camera body is the Canon T2i. I am interested in nature shots (flowers, birds, waterfalls), landscapes, and grandkids. I would love to downsize my lenses and would appreciate your thoughts! Thanks!

[M_Six]

I've been toying with the idea of getting an 18-200 just as a lightweight walk-around lens for my T1i. Adorama has refurbs on sale for $399, so it wouldn't hurt the wallet too bad. But I have the 24-105, so it seems a bit redundant except for the slight increase in range and a little bit of speed on the wide end. On the other hand, Bryan's review of the 18-200 is pretty positive and I've learn to trust his judgment. So I'm waffling about it as well. I'll be interested to see what other folks here have to say about it.

[neuroanatomist]

I played with an 18-200mm once. Bad focus breathing - as you focus nearer than infinity, that 200mm long end quickly drops in apparent focal length. With a subject 15-20 feet away, compared to my 70-200/2.8L IS II (which I assume is 'correct'), the FoV of the 18-200 at 200mm was approximately 154mm.

[FastGass]

Bryan's review about IQ was considering super-zoom's which by nature are inferior to a much shorter zoom range lenses or primes. Remember the 18-200mm is going to be a down grade from the 18-55mm or most lenses you will come across, but you get a very large zoom range and the IQ is still resonable.

John.

[Liz]

Remember the 18-200mm is going to be a down grade from the 18-55mm or most lenses you will come across, but you get a very large zoom range and the IQ is still resonable.

Haven't had much time with an 18-200mm, but wouldn't say that it would actually be a downgrade from the 18-55. Yes the 18-55 is pretty good considering, but for an all around lens? I had a 28-135mm which I liked very much and performed well, but found it sometimes not wide enough, especially since I use a 1.6x crop.
I got the opportunity to purchase 24-105 L in mint condition and I couldn't be happier with it. Also because I still cannot believe I own an "L" lens Good build, quality, sharp, fast, very nice bokeh and range is just enough for me, but I'm not sure if you'd get enough for taking shots of birds.
You could always try the 18-200, see how you like it and if it works for you (don't sell your tamron and tokina yet). If you're not happy, sell the 18-200 and try something different. The good thing about buying Canon lenses is that they hardly decrease in value!

[DSLR_Newbie]

I have a canon 18-200mm lens and I don't think that it is a step down from 18-55mm(standard kit lens).
I use this lens as a one hit travel lens on my 60D and i am very happy with it.

see a few samples from this lens below.

100MM F6.3 1/160 ISO-100


50MM F6.3 1/125 ISO-100


18MM F9.0 1/200 ISO-100


18MM F3.5 1-SEC ISO-3200 (Hand Held)


18MM F8.0 1/160 ISO-100