Walkabout lens

kazgee · Nov 25, 2012

Hi everyone I'm kind of new to photography and new to this forum, was wondering if anyone can help me? I'm looking for a good walkabout/travel lens, I have a canon 550D with the kit lens and a 50mm prime. I was looking at a Tamron 18-200 Tamron 18-250 and Tamron 28-200mm can anyone tell me if any of them are any good or suggest another good lens?

Thank you in advance

pixmedic · Nov 25, 2012

canons 70-200 f4 L if you want to stay on a budget.

MLeeK · Nov 25, 2012

When you purchase an all in one lens you compromise on quality. The lens has to work across a HUGE range of view and that is not easy to achieve. When you go to off brand you are compromising a bit as well. So with the Tamron all in ones you are compromising twofold on the quality.

MLeeK · Nov 25, 2012

There is no reason to cross post this to multiple areas of the forum. Stick to the one area that is best for your question. We see them all in our feed for new posts.

dbvirago · Nov 25, 2012

pixmedic said:
canons 70-200 f4 L if you want to stay on a budget.

I have had this lens for five years and it's a great lens. I had the Tamron 18-270 and it is just too much of a compromise in quality. You can learn a lot by just putting the 50 on and using it as a walkaround.

marvinh · Nov 25, 2012

I use the Tamron 18-270 most of the time. It is a little slow on the long end, but not bad. As for sharpness, I compared it to the Nikon 18-200 and the Tamron is on par with the Nikon.

Regarding the 70-200. I would NOT consider this a walkaround lens. The wide end (70mm) is TOO long. You need the range of the 18-270.

MarvinH

Patrice · Nov 25, 2012

The super-zooms are all about compromises in favour of convenience. As far as which is the best well they are all just about equal to each other. Pick the one you like or is within your budget and go with that. By looking at the buyer reports you could believe any to the epitome of lenses.

As for my experience with one )example it's a slightly different story. When I went seriously digital I bought my first modern af zoom, a Nikon 18-200 DX. I brought that home thinking well this is it, I won't need another zoom in this range ever. A day later I was back at the shop to give it back. That is when I got my 17-55 f/2.8 and my 70-200 f/2.8.

The image was soft mostly everywhere, the build felt cheap, the CA was not well controlled, the aperture was slow, the distortions were pretty bad, ----- nearly everything was compromised in favour of carrying one lens.

My walkabout solution (FX) is a 50 mm mounted, a 28 mm in one pocket and a 135 in another. If this is still too large as when I'm being a tourist and not out playing at being a photographer then a bridge camera fits the bill. (My all-time favourite 'walkabout' camera was a 35mm rangefinder fitted with a 40mm lens.)

pixmedic · Nov 25, 2012

You should look at tamron or sigmas 17-50 f/2.8 or 28-75 f/2.8 as they are both great lenses. You can get either used for a pretty reasonable price. I wouldnt recommend any lens with a variable aperture if you plan on getting serious with your photography at some point. You will just regret spending the money later.

dbvirago · Nov 25, 2012

pixmedic said:
You should look at tamron or sigmas 17-50 f/2.8 or 28-75 f/2.8 as they are both great lenses. You can get either used for a pretty reasonable price. I wouldnt recommend any lens with a variable aperture if you plan on getting serious with your photography at some point. You will just regret spending the money later.

This. My walk around len(s) is the Tamron 17-50 2.8 and the Canon 70-200 f4. About 1k for both new

greybeard · Nov 25, 2012

It depends on how critical the images have to be. The 3 lenses you suggest will do OK as long as the images don't have to be super sharp and you can work with a f/3.5-6.3 aperture. I personally think you should just get a 55-250mm and put it in your pocket and use your 18-55 kit and exchange them when needed. Your images will be a lot less distorted and probably a bit sharper.