I take pictures, others would say "snapping", much, digital since 10 years. Some images are touched up a little. After mein3 17-85 year old had given up the ghost with a known error and should cost the repair 225 and an ex gratia application was abgeleht from Canon, the question of whether I to the existing lenses (50mm, 17-85 and 75 completed 300 without IS) is to exchange the large telephoto through the very well reviewed with image stabilizer. Actually, I always had the change from small to large telephoto annoyed. I photograph a lot of people, some landscapes and the occasional building and flowers. Often the handling of the great gizmos the lenses were always at full capacity, the large at 75mm, the small change in 85th during snowfall or on the sandy beach or a light drizzle was always unpleasant, fisselig.
So I have the 18-200 after long deliberation bought and given preference over the TAMRON. Why? The CANON to have a slightly faster autofocus. For people with children and photography snapshots me was more important than the extra mm and possibly even better image quality (in the theoretical field?). Furthermore, the Canon DPP software knows the lens. This has the advantage that shading or distortion which actually noticeably has the lens in different areas, can be subsequently removed with RAW images on a button on the PC, if they bother you. Under normal snapshots, but do not bother me.
My pictures are, perhaps because the image stabilizer that was perhaps improved over the last 3 years, mostly very sharp, gefühlsmässich even sharper than the old 17-85. I am very pleased with the lens, with the feel and size. To protect the lens, I have placed a rubber sun visor, because you have to know that there is significant shadow at the bottom when using the flash with the built-in flash of my 40D with wide angle.
I would buy the lens immediately and can recommend it as "Always-on".
