Good all around telephoto lens

[CRman]

Got the 24-60 2.8.... See not carring around for "quality shots:" so to speak.... Just random everyday play toy. I have enough (more than it seems) for specifics. I mentioned befor I love my 55-200 VR but it stops at 55mm.... I'll check a few sites and see what I can decide. One of those things I just want to buy and be doen with.

 

[Apex]

If quality isnt the biggest of issues, why not buy a decent P&S with some zoom in it? itl be much smaller than a DSLR of any kind.

 

[audiobomber]

The Tamron 18-250mm has a lot of fans. http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/45-canon-eos-aps-c/293-tamron-af-18-250mm-f35-63-di-ii-ld-aspherical-if-macro-canon-lens-test-report--review

 

[Mav]

If you go to the trouble – and expense – of buying an SLR camera, which' defining factor is the exchangeability of its lenses, then it is stupid to want to do with only one lens. Sorry, but I don't mince words. It would be the same as getting a Mercedes 500 SLC and running it on LNG!

Anybody that says it's "stupid" to do something in photography a certain way is stupid in my book. Sorry, I don't mince words either. People shoot a zillion different things, have a zillion different styles, and that's why there's a zillion different lenses out there. If you're a rock climber or hiker or cyclist or somebody with an active lifestyle who is known to chop handles off of tooth brushes to save weight, are you honestly going to tell me that it's "stupid" to only carry around one lens on an SLR for the same reason? Carrying lots of lenses is a pain at times. And not all of photography is about critical sharpness or having minimal or zero distortion or no falloff or otherwise. A lot of it is about tone and color and just being able to get the shot rather than having to switch lenses and miss it and have no photo at all.

You're more than welcomed to your own approach to photography, but calling others stupid because their needs and approach is different is what's stupid here.

 

[Mav]

There all junk don't waste your money. I guess if you are not concerned about image quality go ahead and buy whatever lens you want but it will suffer with a lens like this.

Here's a shot off my deck at about 200mm. I didn't take this with an 18-200VR or super zoom, but I easily could have.

D40, base ISO 200, 1/1000s, f/11, 70-300VR lens

Had I taken this with an 18-200, what exactly would be so horrible about the photo?

 

[Mav]

Looking at getting a lens that if I want to just carry one, I can do so.

Something like a 18-300 or 28-300... somewhere along those lines. I know Sigma, and tamron make them but I am looking to get feed back on who has what and how they like them. Chime in if you have a good suggestion.

Thanks!

As long as you could make do with the long end being enough, I love my Nikon 18-135 lens. It's sharp wide open if you need to shoot it there, even at the long end, has nice bokeh for portraits unlike every other kit lens that Nikon has made, and it's dirt cheap at about $200 used. No VR either, but I've gotten by just fine without it even during night time city walkaround shots.