18-200 and 70-200


Jul 16, 2010
725
0
0
#1
Ok this is a really noob question but im really interested to find out the answer. Why the vast price difference between the 2 and also the build is so different? What are the specs that the 70-200 have that brings so much more than the 18-200? Image quality wise? Fast? And furthermore the 18-200 has a wider range of zoom. I really dont understand.
 

engrmariano

Senior Member
Oct 18, 2007
3,532
0
0
Rivervale
#2
70-200 has constant f/2.8 aperture.

while 18-200 has f/3.5-5.6 aperture.

as the aperture number goes down, the more expensive the lens get...
 

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,644
63
48
lil red dot
#3
Ok this is a really noob question but im really interested to find out the answer. Why the vast price difference between the 2 and also the build is so different? What are the specs that the 70-200 have that brings so much more than the 18-200? Image quality wise? Fast? And furthermore the 18-200 has a wider range of zoom. I really dont understand.
Just go down to the show room and look at both lenses and you will know why.

Once you use them both and know what they are each capable of, you will REALLY understand why.
 

wdEvA

Senior Member
Sep 1, 2006
6,284
0
36
etanphotography.com
#4
the 70-200 is a pro class lens
18-200 is a superzoom consumer lens

the difference in aperture, constant 2.8 for the 70-200 already gives a BIG price difference, adding on the pro coating on the glass, weather sealed body, and it's one of canon's sharpest tele-zoom lens.
 

Anthony Lee

Senior Member
Feb 12, 2009
2,465
2
38
Shunfu Road, Singapore
#5
Ok this is a really noob question but im really interested to find out the answer. Why the vast price difference between the 2 and also the build is so different? What are the specs that the 70-200 have that brings so much more than the 18-200? Image quality wise? Fast? And furthermore the 18-200 has a wider range of zoom. I really dont understand.
For the 18-200 to be as good as the 70-200, it has to be twice the size. In simple language, the 18-200 uses smaller and poorer quality glasses and build, that's why it is smaller, lighter, cheaper and lousier. Also, you will be surprised, the wider the zoom range, the lousier it may be. Google "constant aperture zoom lens vs variable aperture zoom lens" and you will understand better.
 

spentaz

New Member
Aug 13, 2010
39
0
0
#6
Ok this is a really noob question but im really interested to find out the answer. Why the vast price difference between the 2 and also the build is so different? What are the specs that the 70-200 have that brings so much more than the 18-200? Image quality wise? Fast? And furthermore the 18-200 has a wider range of zoom. I really dont understand.
Try renting the lens and you will better understand why:) 18-200 was built for more a
compact all in one telezoom, of course you will sacrifice image and build quality, and of course,
the micro motor versus the USM ones in the 70-200. But it's very convenient, there's little or no need to change lens.

70-200, I have rented the F4IS and the F2.8IS, and I got poisoned:( The focusing speed and all, once you try it, you won't forget:bigeyes:. I currently saving up to buying the F4IS :bsmilie:

Don't worry TS, I was like you 6 months back when I first started in the DSLR world, shoot more, read more articles online and you will understand better.
 

Last edited:
Jul 16, 2010
725
0
0
#7
70-200 has constant f/2.8 aperture.

while 18-200 has f/3.5-5.6 aperture.

as the aperture number goes down, the more expensive the lens get...

I see... something to think about.
 

Jul 16, 2010
725
0
0
#8
Just go down to the show room and look at both lenses and you will know why.

Once you use them both and know what they are each capable of, you will REALLY understand why.


Is there a canon showroom in our country?
 

Jul 16, 2010
725
0
0
#9
For the 18-200 to be as good as the 70-200, it has to be twice the size. In simple language, the 18-200 uses smaller and poorer quality glasses and build, that's why it is smaller, lighter, cheaper and lousier. Also, you will be surprised, the wider the zoom range, the lousier it may be. Google "constant aperture zoom lens vs variable aperture zoom lens" and you will understand better.


Ok this is very helpful haha thanks.
 

Jul 16, 2010
725
0
0
#10
Try renting the lens and you will better understand why:) 18-200 was built for more a
compact all in one telezoom, of course you will sacrifice image and build quality, and of course,
the micro motor versus the USM ones in the 70-200. But it's very convenient, there's little or no need to change lens.

70-200, I have rented the F4IS and the F2.8IS, and I got poisoned:( The focusing speed and all, once you try it, you won't forget:bigeyes:. I currently saving up to buying the F4IS :bsmilie:

Don't worry TS, I was like you 6 months back when I first started in the DSLR world, shoot more, read more articles online and you will understand better.


I can see that i have alot more to learn ~~~
 

Anson

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2006
8,210
7
38
ansonchew.com
www.ansonchew.com
#12
I owned both lenses, comparing these two is like comparing Apple and Orange. If you don't mind the weight and price of the L, the 70-200F2.8IS's IQ and focusing is better than 18-200IS.
 

Blur L

New Member
Aug 3, 2010
23
0
0
#13
haha... it's like comparing Toyota vs Lexus... both from same company. :bsmilie:

the technical differences hv been correctly highlighted by fellow CSers above.

if u like a remedy from :devil: BBB virus, let me know...
 

Last edited:

Blur L

New Member
Aug 3, 2010
23
0
0
#14
I owned both lenses, comparing these two is like comparing Apple and Orange. If you don't mind the weight and price of the L, the 70-200F2.8IS's IQ and focusing is better than 18-200IS.
haha... bro Anson, i hv a gut feel u would respond to this. :)

i hv the 18-200IS too, but utilize probably 1% of its potential, when compared to your amazing shots with 18-200IS. Great pics! And I truly believe your saying "the lens is only as good as its wielder". I have lots to learn.
 

enzeru21

New Member
Apr 7, 2010
1,494
0
0
upper thomson
#15
no fight at all, 70-200 wins...

but its not just about having the best camera or lens..

for photography, you need to learn from the basics, a newbie using a 7D and 70-200 but doesn't have a strong grounding in the basics of photography, will also not be able to take interesting photos.. maybe can take good quality picture but nothing exciting..

compare that with a senior who has a strong base, give him a 350D and a 18-55 kit lens still can come up with something one...

so make sure you don't try to jump the gun and become an expert overnight!
 

Blur Shadow

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2005
4,886
4
0
#16
Step 1
Just take the 2 lenses and look at them. Compare the build quality, the perceivable greater craftmanship involved. Not to mention the various lenses and the type of technology employed.

Step 2
Take a couple of pictures.

Step 3
Compare the image quality.
 

dingaroo

New Member
Dec 6, 2009
1,950
0
0
Singapore | East
#18
Is there a canon showroom in our country?
Canon LiNK is just next to the Challenger @ Vivocity. You may ask nicely from the counter staff to try out the lens that you are eyeing.

Bring along your camera to try out so that you get a better feel of the lens with the body.

HTH.
 

#19
Ok this is a really noob question but im really interested to find out the answer. Why the vast price difference between the 2 and also the build is so different? What are the specs that the 70-200 have that brings so much more than the 18-200? Image quality wise? Fast? And furthermore the 18-200 has a wider range of zoom. I really dont understand.
I'm not a Canon user but the usage of these 2 lenses varies.

70-200mm "fast" lens (f2.8) is used by many people to shoot sports (i.e. dragon boat race) & wildlife (i.e. Zoo).
As for the "slower" 18-200mm lens, you can use it for many purposes. It's a versatile lens. You can shoot landscape, simple portraiture and maybe wildlife too.
 

Anson

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2006
8,210
7
38
ansonchew.com
www.ansonchew.com
#20
haha... bro Anson, i hv a gut feel u would respond to this. :)

i hv the 18-200IS too, but utilize probably 1% of its potential, when compared to your amazing shots with 18-200IS. Great pics! And I truly believe your saying "the lens is only as good as its wielder". I have lots to learn.
Thanks for the praise.. I am continually learn from my camera and the pros around me.. as a photographer, I will always be a student. :sweat:
 

Top Bottom