Dilemma between 17-55mm f/2.8 and 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G VR

[wasabi8888]

How good you want the image quality be?

What are your photos used for? Commercial or shoot for fun?

How big do you need your photos to be? 640x425 for posting online or printing A3 size posters?

Agree with Gri Gri. really depends... the 2 lens is really different.. 18-200 can go up to 200.. 17-35 cant.. you have to decide what you want to shoot.. looking at your posts.. go with 17-35 and slowly add the rest... you will then not regret but will have to wait to get the rest of the lenses if budget is an issue

 

[GriGri]

Collections of photos by 18-200 at Flickr:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/72604026@N00/pool/

 

[posez]

The 18-200 is great for street and travel photography. I think you may need something faster if you are shooting events.

All in all though, the IQ really isn't that bad. I think most of us on the forum here are probably pixel peepers to seom extent - me included! Otherwise, the prints that I have been making off the 18-200 are really alright.

 

[Milestone]

Friends, bruthers and sis, thank you all for your advice. I think I will go for 18-200 (for the time being)

 

[rodel]

1. do you think you need to vary your focal length widely in a wide variety of genres (distances)?

2. if you do, do you think you can change fast and is willing to change lens to achieve that?

no to 1.
17-55mm

yes to 1 but no to 2.
18-200mm

yes to 1 and yes to 2.
17-55mm + 70-200mm

you want the best optical quality and want to cover the range, you just got to change lens. not wanting to change lens, you got to sacrifice one of them. lack of optical quality is relative. lack of focal length coverage is absolute.

:thumbsup: