New Tamron 18-200mm Zoom is The Lightest* in the World

[TeT]

Price is right. It is all about how it compares to the Canon & Nikon equivalent lenses. I believe Canon has it in the works somewhere to upgrade the 18 200 IS...

Very usable lenses especially for travel etc... you wont miss the shot with that range and you wont fall out from the weight; think SL1 + Tam 18 200 v 1DX + 28 300 L on a family hike up the volcano..

I have owned the 18 200 Canon in the past & will reaquire a similar lens for coming family spring break trip to Cali to go with my SL1...

 

[RGF]

Price is right. It is all about how it compares to the Canon & Nikon equivalent lenses. I believe Canon has it in the works somewhere to upgrade the 18 200 IS...

Very usable lenses especially for travel etc... you wont miss the shot with that range and you wont fall out from the weight; think SL1 + Tam 18 200 v 1DX + 28 300 L on a family hike up the volcano..

I have owned the 18 200 Canon in the past & will reaquire a similar lens for coming family spring break trip to Cali to go with my SL1...

Agree. Like to see Canon step up and create its own version.

 

[Etienne]

These superzooms tend to produce crappy shots at all focal lengths. The only exception has been the Canon 18-135 IS STM, which is probably still a better buy than this Tamron, even with the shorter range.

 

[Dantana]

I had the Canon 18-200 when I was shooting crop. I thought the trade-off in image quality for portability (1 lens vs 2) would justify the purchase. I ended up using it for one trip and then not taking it out much after that.

Before I got the lens, I had been thinking a zoom with both a very large zoom range and very good quality were a possibility. I remembered way back to my days in the film department in college with Zeiss and Angeniuex 10x1 cinema zooms. These were older lenses. I figured that a modern large range zoom was possible, even if the quality was not quite as good. What I wasn't taking into account was the size of those lenses. They were constant aperture zooms made for 16mm, a format much smaller than APS-C, but they were pretty big lenses. To make that kind of lens for crop or full frame would yield a huge result that no one would want to carry around.

In retrospect, I wish I had put the money towards different glass. The Canon was not as cheap as this Tamron, and it would have helped me out towards another lens. When I sold it a few months ago, I didn't get back much for it.

I can't speak for this new Tamron, but I would just say, don't expect too much. There is a reason that high end lenses don't cover this kind of zoom range.

 

[TeT]

This lens is for when you want to strap the camera round your neck enjoy your day and take a couple of pictures along the way...

Some of you act as if you are disappointed that it's not Studio Quality Glass. If it is better than the current Canon EF-S 18 200 IS at $249 then this lens will be a roaring success... (either better IQ in the center range or faster on the focus would qualify as better; both would be sensational)

 

[Etienne]

This lens is for when you want to strap the camera round your neck enjoy your day and take a couple of pictures along the way...

Some of you act as if you are disappointed that it's not Studio Quality Glass. If it is better than the current Canon EF-S 18 200 IS at $249 then this lens will be a roaring success... (either better IQ in the center range or faster on the focus would qualify as better; both would be sensational)

A sharp lens with a shorter focal length can usually be cropped to the equivalent 200, resulting in every bit as good a pic, often better. This is even more true with the higher resolution sensors that are coming out.

So the Canon 18-135 IS STM will be far better in it's native range, and probably just as good as the tamron when cropped to 200mm equiv. So these super zoom lenses are not delivering the value you might think

 

[kalieaire]

someone please let me know when they make one that's f2.8 and par focal.

 

[IglooEater]

someone please let me know when they make one that's f2.8 and par focal.

not sure if it's parafocal, but http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/10/about-that-35-300mm-f2-8-you-wanted

 

[TeT]

IF it is not good enough the beat a crop from the 18 135 STM then they whiffed...

 

[Hjalmarg1]

what's interesting for me is that on certain website it is rumored to be HKD 1880. (242usd / 156GBP). that's kit lens territory!

Tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di VC PZD Lens equivalent for full frame is way more expensive and IQ is OK but not great.

 

[TeT]

what's interesting for me is that on certain website it is rumored to be HKD 1880. (242usd / 156GBP). that's kit lens territory!

Tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di VC PZD Lens equivalent for full frame is way more expensive and IQ is OK but not great.

Looked at both the PZD super zoom lenses; both are lousy. In the case of the 18 270, the PZD is significantly worse than the non PZD of same focal range; across the board. (note the PZD runs a 62mm front to the non PZD 72mm front) Am guessing the Pierzo Drive was so large they had to leave the actual glass out of the lens... (its that poor of IQ)

 

[Pitspics]

This lens is for when you want to strap the camera round your neck enjoy your day and take a couple of pictures along the way...

Some of you act as if you are disappointed that it's not Studio Quality Glass. If it is better than the current Canon EF-S 18 200 IS at $249 then this lens will be a roaring success... (either better IQ in the center range or faster on the focus would qualify as better; both would be sensational)

if I want to strap a camera round my neck just to take a couple of pictures and i know that the quality is not studio or even good i would be more interested in a small p&s camera for around eur 350,- (sony rx100 or whatever)
- super lightweight
- much smaller than an (small) dslr with a big lens from which i know its not the best image quality

i never understood the combination dslr + cheap superzoom.
today, every p&s-camera can take also very good image quality... (how often do you print poster from your "walk-around-trip? ???

i often compared (daylight-) pictures - dslr and (for example) my fuji x20... downsize them in photoshop at 1920x1080 oder maybe 2048 x 1536 for ipad, do a little bit sharpening and you wont see a big difference.

(all together, maybe a little bit worse than crop-dslr - but the fact of size and weight makes a "p&s-walk-around-zoom-camera" much more comfortable.)


if i want good/premium quality (nightshots for example)... I take my FF and a good glass.
If that doesn´t matter (walk-around)... p&s is the way to go


what i would like to say... cheap superzoom... WHY??? ;D