Got my Canon 18-200mm...is it me or the lens?

[mitchel]

Thanks Tim...exactly what I saw. []


Ido like the extra zoom as compared to my 17-85mm....so I guess I am really getting double the zoom for $500, but I wonder if I would be happier with the 70-300mm and just live with swapping lenses which is what DSLR's are made to do.


I'm sure if the only lens I had was the 18-200 I would be fine, but now that I compared it to my 17-85mm things changed.


To be honest...I thought that when I looked through the 18-200 I was going to say...holy $#!@, that is one stupid sweet zoom lens!!!


So...what do you guys think...what would you do?

[Oren]

I thought that when I looked through the 18-200 I was going to say...holy $#!@
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

That's what I thought before looking through a sigma (I think) 70-300... but it let me down - wasn't that great at all.


As for greater focal length, I have no idea as I haven't had a chance to look through anything beyond 300mm. But I do have a 12x25 bushnell binocular, and according to Bryan, x12 magnification is equal to a 600mm lens and I must tell you that it's amazing. I even used my Canon S60 and took photos using my binocular lol - IQ is of course not even close to what you can take with an SLR + 600mm lens, but it was still nice to try.


Maybe I'll post these pictures later so you can see what the results look like.

[Tim]

I've always wondered this, what focal length equals binocular multiplication. I figured that since a normal lens is 50mm, a 6x binocular would be equivalent to 6x50mm, or 300mm. I guess since a 600mm lens should be 12x, this supports my logic.