What are you walking around with?

[LateModelSedan]

okay, i've been shooting with high end "prosumer" p/s cams for quite some time now and now that i've jumped into a dslr i'm trying to figure out what best suits my needs. basically i am looking for ideas/suggestions pertaining to good walkaround lenses. lately my 50mm has been heavily used but i find it a bit awkward at times when its not quite wide enough and i have to painstakingly re-position myself or re-compose my shots. these are problems that i never encountered having used 10x, 12x, & 16x optical zooms on p/s cams. i know alot of people would say that that's where the real creativity comes in and i do believe that but i think a different lens may be better suited to my everyday needs.

i haven't decided whether a zoom or prime would best suit me. i mainly shoot architecture and landscapes. another favorite subject is urban blight (we have tons of that here in philly). and to be quite frank, anything of L series quality (and cost) is not an option at this point in time. the kit lens does a good job but i am leaning towards a prime lens. primes are cheaper and faster and that matters a bit more to me than super telephoto capability. and last but not least, i'd like for my next lens to compliment the other two as far as focal range is concerned. so what are you guys toting around everyday and why do you love what you're using?

 

[Miaow]

I myself have just the standard kit lens of 18-55mm and a 75-300mm zoom that the Canon came with. Last week at a zoo i had the zoom on the whole time - i ended up missing a few shots i wanted cause I didnt have the time sometimes to change the lenses. Usually though I just keep the 18-55 on it.

I know a friend of mine is thinking of getting himself a 18-200mm cause he doesn't like the idea of changing lenses but he wants a reasonable zoom (he currently has just the kit lens of 18-55).

 

[dEARlEADER]

use 18 - 200...

I don't like missing shots.... and I'm not found of toting a sack of primes........

if you just shoot scapes and buildings maybe you just need 10 - 20..

 

[djrichie28]

I agree with the 18-200mm. Awesome range and perfect for the 'walk around lens' you are looking for. Few will argue that this lens in not perfectly sharp, but more will argue the versatility of range outweighs the slight loss of sharpness.

 

[Battou]

I carry three lenses for walks, 35mm, 50mm and (usually) 80-200mm. If I can't get the shot I want with one of those, it was not ment to be.

 

[davebmck]

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS. I paid about $410 for it. Great lens for the coverage it gives you.

 

[patrickt]

Primes feel good but I like the convenience of a zoom. When I'm out and about I have a zoom on my camera, two zooms and one prime in my backpack. My normal zooms are 24-90mm, 12-24mm, and a 50-200mm. The prime I normally carry is my 35mm f/2.

 

[Village Idiot]

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS. I paid about $410 for it. Great lens for the coverage it gives you.

Unfortunately, it's slow and soft on the close end, iirc. The 70-200 f/2.8 would be better.

OP - If you can save the cash, look at a used Sigma 10-20mm UWA. I think about $500 used is the going rate, but it's a great lens.

 

[LateModelSedan]

well, i'm not gonna kid you guys or myself into thinking i am gonna buy a $500 lens now. i am just not ready for that yet. i need to work on my skills before i take the big jump into serious glass. what i began to do is search adorama lenses for my canon sorted by price from lowest to highest and googled reviews for each lens. no, i do not expect to find a 5 star rating in my price range but for now some decent glass will do. problem is, alot of the reviews could go either way. almost makes me feel like none of the lower priced zooms are any good. so far these are a few that i'm considering:

Sigma 55mm - 200mm f/4-5,6 DC
Tamron 70mm - 300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD
Tamron 55mm - 200mm f/4-5.6 DI-II LD
Sigma 70mm - 300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG

i know they aren't that fast but as i said, it makes more sense to me to become a good photographer before i blow a paycheck on a lens. reviews on comparable canon glass seem to be somewhat poor. if anyone owns any of these lenses (or comparable ones from other manufacturers) i'd love to hear your comments on them and whether or not you'd recommend them. thanks to those who have already offered input.

 

[JerryPH]

Without knowing what brand of prosumer camera you have, one cannot give a proper recommendation.

As far as Nikon lenses, the ultimate walk-around lens is their 18-200 VR. It is without match. As long as you are willing to accept a little softness at either extremes and a little vignetting at the long end, there is nothing more convenient. Both issues are easy to address in PS too.

This last St-Patrick's day parade I took it with me and if you want to see the results, here they are.

The 70-200 is an awesome lens, very much so the leader in many venues, but I find it near useless to use indoors and in any situation where I want to be within 20 feet or less of a human sized subject. That is when I use my Sigma 18-50 DC EX HSM Macro if ultimate quality is the goal when a fast lens is needed, or the 18-200 if I am outside and not needing the very best quality possible.

 

[NateS]

Unfortunately, it's slow and soft on the close end, iirc. The 70-200 f/2.8 would be better.

OP - If you can save the cash, look at a used Sigma 10-20mm UWA. I think about $500 used is the going rate, but it's a great lens.

The sigma 10-20 is $499 new at B&H, so I'd guess an even lower cost for a used one. 10-20 would probably be best if you primarily shoot landscapes and arcitecture.

 

[NateS]

well, i'm not gonna kid you guys or myself into thinking i am gonna buy a $500 lens now. i am just not ready for that yet. i need to work on my skills before i take the big jump into serious glass. what i began to do is search adorama lenses for my canon sorted by price from lowest to highest and googled reviews for each lens. no, i do not expect to find a 5 star rating in my price range but for now some decent glass will do. problem is, alot of the reviews could go either way. almost makes me feel like none of the lower priced zooms are any good. so far these are a few that i'm considering:

Sigma 55mm - 200mm f/4-5,6 DC
Tamron 70mm - 300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD
Tamron 55mm - 200mm f/4-5.6 DI-II LD
Sigma 70mm - 300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG

i know they aren't that fast but as i said, it makes more sense to me to become a good photographer before i blow a paycheck on a lens. reviews on comparable canon glass seem to be somewhat poor. if anyone owns any of these lenses (or comparable ones from other manufacturers) i'd love to hear your comments on them and whether or not you'd recommend them. thanks to those who have already offered input.

I'm a little confused by this post. You say you primarily shoot landscape and architecture, yet list 4 telephoto zooms as your options. Out of the 4 you listed, I'd have to recommend the Sigma 70-300 APO DG Macro. It is a supurb lens for the price and if you can stop it down to f/8 on a sunny day it gets super sharp. However, those are all lenses that will be usesless for architecture or landscaping. On a budget, you might as well pick up an 18-55 kit lens for that task.

Edit: Check the link in my sig and the Animal photos were all taken with the Sigma 70-300.

 

[BoblyBill]

I am a wide angle guy and rarely go above 55mm. If I go to the zoo, then I'll take my 70-300 but most of the time I just have my 18-55mm (which has just been replaced with my 17-40mm L:hug:. On storm chases, I had a 28-85mm and a 28-300mm and they were always set up the same: 28mm at f/8.

 

[LateModelSedan]

I'm a little confused by this post. You say you primarily shoot landscape and architecture, yet list 4 telephoto zooms as your options. Out of the 4 you listed, I'd have to recommend the Sigma 70-300 APO DG Macro. It is a supurb lens for the price and if you can stop it down to f/8 on a sunny day it gets super sharp. However, those are all lenses that will be usesless for architecture or landscaping. On a budget, you might as well pick up an 18-55 kit lens for that task.

Edit: Check the link in my sig and the Animal photos were all taken with the Sigma 70-300.

i understand your confusion. i only listed zooms because the bulk of the replies so far were from users who are using zooms as a primary walkaround. i was also pricing sigma and canon superwides but i just don't really know for sure what would serve me best which is precisely why i value your opinion.

 

[NateS]

Slightly off topic here, but after seeing some of your landscapes BobblyBill, I'm gonna put my 70-300 away and use the 18-55 to try and better my landscape photography. Amazing stuff in your gallery.