Canon EFS 18-200 3.5-5.6 IS - Official

[jeff_higdon]

Canon's USA website now has the EFS 18-200 listed

 

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=149&modelid=17518

[anthony_hicks]

Great. Another superzoom. Just what I was waiting for... not.

 

Meanwhile, the mediocre 28/1.8, archaic 28/2.8, and fragile 50/1.4 soldier on, all desperately in need of an update.

[photo_dark]

I agree with Anthony. However I can't blame them... People are scooping up mid-level SLR's like they are going out of style... I'm guessing they can afford to ignore the rest of us indefinitely.

 

Ie... 3 different xxD camera releases over the (very drawn out) lifespan of the 5D. Common Canon, throw us a bone here.

[jason_hall5]

Just think David, the longer they wait, the more features they will have to put into it. I just sure as heck hope it is not that new "CA" Mode.

 

Jason

[w_t1]

Count me out. Just bought a 35 f2 lens yesterday, in fact.

[tdigi]

Anthony I could not agree more.

[anders_carlsson]

Why no USM (if not simply to save money)? Is there any technical reason?

[ben_quinn1]

How boring and predictable this piece of news is

[jeff_higdon]

Ben:

 

Glad to be of service, but let's not kill the messenger.

 

This type of lens seems to have sold well for Nikon and Tamron has done well with its various models in search of a

consumer vacation lens/walk around. It's probably not the ticket for many/most of the readers on this board.

 

Will it serve as competition for the other consumer walk around lenses: the 17-85 IS (which has FTM and USM -

neither of which is on the new 18-200), the package of the new IS lenses 18-55 kit and 55-250? Will its image quality

appraoch that of the 70-300 IS?

 

Curious that it's been paired as a kit lens with the 50D. Seems more at home on the XSi.

[Doug Obert]

There are times or places for a lens like this. I might buy one. My pack is heavy enough already (spotting scope, tripod, camera with two lenses to cover this range, two quarts of water, extra clothes and several other misc. items) Around my neck are my binoculars and I carry my rifle. If I can shave some weight and space I will. Sure, the other two lenses are better, but sometimes a compromise is worth it.

[cavepaintings]

For the same reason Porsche made the Cayenne. Its totally out of character for them to make 4X4 SUV \ People carrier, but their market was being eaten away by other brands so they responded. Chumps who normally bought a 911 twonk wagon were buying, god forbid, one of those common Renaults, and at a fifth of the price. ergo Porsche decided to make a tall estate 4x4 version and slap a silly price tag on and the sheep came back to the fold.

Canon have seen some of their cake go to Sigma and want it back.

Personally I shoot Eos and Mamiya rz67 (but shot zenit \ pentax et al on my way) and prefer primes \ 2.8 zooms etc. Nice big wide glass. For my sins when I first got a digital I got a sigma 28-300 with I think 6.3 at the long end. It did virtually nothing well but could cover a lot of things. Now after carrying the rz about weight isn't an issue but I must admit there are days when I pickup the wifes panasonic pas and love the fact an 8mp camera fits in my palm. I'm probably in the minority, and whilst canon probably charge a decent markup on my gear compared to the latest 8-500mm f12 IS the superzoom will outsell my lenses 1000 to 1 so overall they make more money and take more market share.

Some 2.8 IS zooms from canon would be lovely but unlikely. Some redesigns of the wider primes also would be welcomed, but by maybe 400 people, and that doesnt justify the expense. I'm not defending them, I hate that they are pandering to the "I can't work my ipleb" crowd, but hey, they outnumber and therefore outspend us.

[JDMvW]

Once they "improve" those "mediocre and fragile" primes, some of which are as good in IQ as many much more expensive zoom lenses, the prices will go up. Be careful what you wish for.

[bobatkins]

I'm not really sure what the market is for a $700 consumer zoom that doesn't even have a USM motor. That's an

awful lot of cash for a lens that's not likely to be all that impressive.

 

Time (and testing) will tell or course, but Sigma have an optically stabilized zoom for EOS at a significantly lower

price, and Canon's own EF-S 18-55IS and 55-250IS lens set is about half the price of the 18-200.

 

I'd agree that this is about the last lens most serious photographers would want, but Canon's motives are to make

money, not keep serious photographers happy by making available new prime lenses that the average consumer

won't even consider.

 

For around $2000, you can now have an EOS 50D with a 18-200 zoom on it that you never have to take off the

camera. No dust issues, no messing with lenses. With the new face detection, Live View and CA modes on the 50D,

you've just invented the world's largest, heaviest and least convenient P&S camera! Of course it can't shoot movies, but the new Nikon D90 (to be announced tomorrow) even has that capability.

[pgranone]

The Canon EF 50mm F1.4 was updated.

 

It is called the Sigma 50mm F1.4

 

a very nice update it is.

[pgranone]

My Canon S3 IS was broken.

The Canon EF-S 18-200 on an EOS Rebel XT would be nice replacement.

An SLR version of the super zoom camera.

 

Perfect for my 13 year old daughter to learn photography with.

[tdigi]

Bob thats funny but also true about it being a large point and click.

I guess I don't understand the superzoom. Why have an SLR if your not gonna change lenses?

[jason_hall5]

>>>>"I'm not really sure what the market is for a $700 consumer zoom that doesn't even have a USM motor. That's an awful lot of cash for a lens that's not likely to be all that impressive"<<<<

 

They are going to ask $700.00 for this lens! I was really interested in this lens as a light carry around, take pictures of the kidds at the zoo kind of thing. But crap, not for that kind of money. Like Bob said, for a lens with out USM and will probably not be impressive IQ, that is a rip.

 

Jason

[jason_hall5]

>>>>"With the new face detection, Live View and CA modes on the 50D, you've just invented the world's largest, heaviest and least convenient P&S camera!"<<<<

 

You are so right, this is getting sad.

 

Jason

[jason_hall5]

>>>>"The Canon EF 50mm F1.4 was updated.

 

It is called the Sigma 50mm F1.4

 

a very nice update it is."<<<<<

 

With a price to match...

 

Jason

[phule]

[[you've just invented the world's largest, heaviest and least convenient P&S camera!]]

 

You say this as if most DSLR consumers are not already using their cameras this way.

[arie_vandervelden1]

I'm curious to see if this lens will sell.

 

Will people snap it up like Nikon 18-200 VR, think it's the perfect all-in-one travel lens? Will it essentially have the

same image quality as the 17-85, but with more reach? I remember about a year ago or so when the Nikon 18-200

VR was on backorder and shops just couldn't keep them on the shelves.

 

Or will it go down into obscurity like Canon's previous superzooms 28-300 and 35-350? Like Bob points out, the two

IS kit lenses are half the cost. Sigma already has a cheaper 18-200 OS and Tamron is working on a stabilized

superzoom that's got even more reach.

[arie_vandervelden1]

p.s.

 

$700 is the same price as the Nikkor 18-200 VR. The Nikkor does have silent-wave AF.

[jeff_higdon]

Sorry to pile on, but the filter size is 72mm.

[JDMvW]

I'm less worried about the USM business. I've got Canon lenses with several different focus drives, and while the

USM is definitely quieter, I don't see much difference in the kind of shooting I do (everything pretty much

standing still, you know). ;)

 

There's not much doubt on my part that two IS kit lenses together (18-55 and 55-250) make a better choice, unless

the 18-200 is optically better than it's likely to be. This is very clearly a response to the same lens on the

Nikon side--so be happy that Canon is actually responding and not lying there like a dead cow. This promises well

for other soon-to-be (we hope) introductions.

 

The old "Microsoft rule", of course, always applies: "Never buy version point zero"

[bobatkins]

"Why have an SLR if your not gonna change lenses?"

 

Haven't you heard? If you take the lens off, dust gets into the camera and works it's way onto the sensor. Also changing lenses is work. Why do it when you don't need to? Having just one lens is soooo much more convenient.