Tamron 18-200 XR DI II or Canon 28-200 for 20D

Discussion in 'Canon' started by Robbie, Oct 7, 2005.

  1. Robbie

    Robbie Guest

    I am looking at these two lens. The Tamron was recommended to me via a third
    party. It is 100 bucks cheaper than the Canon, and has a wider range.
    However, the Canon is not limited to only smaller digital sensors, the
    Tamron says not for use with larger sensors.
    Tamron = 399
    Canon = 479

    I am not a brand follower, so that part does not matter to me. I am more
    interested in picture quality, all things being equal. I am leaning more to
    the Canon, because I can use that on larger sensors in the future if I ever
    get one. However, if the Tamron takes noticeable better images, then I will
    go that route.

    Can anyone offer some comparisons of the two, mainly likes or dislikes.
    Again, I am not concerned with the brand or religious wars.

    Thanks so much.
     
    Robbie, Oct 7, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Robbie

    Mike Warren Guest

    I can't offer a comparison but was not impressed with the Tamron
    18-200 when I tested it.

    Do you really need such a range in one lens?

    The other thing is that the Canon lens only goes to 28mm and
    on the 20D will not be very wide.

    -Mike
     
    Mike Warren, Oct 7, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. I suggest looking at the Sigma 18-200 too. It seems to be a bit better
    performer then the Tamron 18-200 and is the same price.
     
    Michael Johnson, PE, Oct 7, 2005
    #3
  4. Robbie

    Bill Guest

    I can't offer comparisons because like you, I care about image quality
    first and foremost.

    There's a reason the best glass does not have such a dramatic zoom
    range. It's very difficult to design and build a lense that can cover
    that range and give sharp, high contrast images. It can be done, but it
    costs a LOT more than $399...trust me.

    If you want the wide angle and the telephoto ranges, and you also want
    high quality images, then you need a minimum of two lenses. One to cover
    the wide end, like a 17-40 f/4 L, and for the long end, a 70-200 f/4 L.

    These are just two examples since I have these lenses and I can attest
    to their high performance. They cost a fair bit more than $399 too, but
    they are definitely worth it for sharp, high quality images.

    You can go with cheaper 18-55 and 75-300 lenses and still get fair
    quality, better than the 18-200 range would give you I think.

    As for brand wars, I don't think I'm a fanatic, but I definitely prefer
    Canon over Tamron, Sigma, or Tokina for various reasons. Basically I've
    never been overly impressed with the third-party lenses. I may be more
    critical than the average joe though, so it's all relative...
     
    Bill, Oct 8, 2005
    #4
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.