Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Quote: Yes buy two lenses. sorry but megga zooms are always a compromise, and they will struggle to even match the performance of kit lenses.
I have the kit lens,sigma 10 20 and Tamron 70 300 as part of my kit. From what your saying John would a 18/250 be worth the invesment. My reason for the enquiery is it does get a bit of a strain sometimes lugging all this around and you can bet your life if I do only stick one lens on the camera and go with that something will crop up needing a lens I left at home. Saying all of that I dont want to compramise too much on image quality. Thanks for your help once again.
Ah its all perspective, when I travel light I only take the 17-40, 50-200 and 10-20. :-0
Another way of thinking of it, the 18-250 will weigh as much as the 70-300 perhaps a bit more. so how heavy is your kit lens, not too much I bet. So is it worth it?
In my view not, but we each draw our own conclusion.
I have a Sigma 18-200 zoom which I use on my K10D. The prime aim for acquiring it was to minimise the kit I carry when walking (a body and single lens) and it covers the wide range of landscapes to semi-macro. At the longer end I tend to switch on the anti-shake. I try to keep away from max aperture and have found the results to be perfectly acceptable but, as one might expect, macro results are not as good as a dedicated macro lens (105 mm Sigma). Hope that this helps.
Quote: I have a Sigma 18-200 zoom which I use on my K10D. The prime aim for acquiring it was to minimise the kit I carry when walking (a body and single lens) and it covers the wide range of landscapes to semi-macro. At the longer end I tend to switch on the anti-shake. I try to keep away from max aperture and have found the results to be perfectly acceptable but, as one might expect, macro results are not as good as a dedicated macro lens (105 mm Sigma). Hope that this helps.
Thanks for the reply Im going to look into this a little longer and may be ask at my dealers if it might be possible to try on both lenses, but I better wait till he is in a realy good mood LOL.
Just a thought but I have already the Tamron 70/300 apart from the wider focal range of the 18/200 or 28/300 would either of the lenses offer better results at 70 onwards than my 70/300. My only reason for thinking of buying the lens is to lighten the load Im not into any one form of photography just like to shoot what catches the eye.
Quote: Just a thought but I have already the Tamron 70/300 apart from the wider focal range of the 18/200 or 28/300 would either of the lenses offer better results at 70 onwards than my 70/300. My only reason for thinking of buying the lens is to lighten the load Im not into any one form of photography just like to shoot what catches the eye.
I am either in macro mode - shooting mainly insects, when I need specialist lenses or in general mode when I just need something light. I too have a 70-300 Sigma APO which I use for macro work (can't afford a 180 macro) along with the 105 macro. The 70-300 will probably be as good as the 18-200 and with longer reach, but you would need to carry another short zoom, e.g. 18-55 to cover any landscape work. This was the dilemma I was in when I got the 18-200.
I was thinking about buying the Tamron 28-300 VC so I don't have to switch lens to often and was wondering about 2 things.
How good is the stabilization? I have a Canon 17-85 IS wich is pretty good at stabilizing, I get the 3 stops promised by Canon.
My other point is about the lens 6.3 max aperture at 300mm. I own a Canon 400D and I wondered if the 6.3 would make the autofocus more difficult. I pretty sure it will but how big is the difference compared to a 5.6 opening?
I beg to differ on the focussing powers of the 28/300 Tamron!...this is a much underated lens....it knocks spots off the 70/300 and other lenses in its class.........Check out my portfolio page4...Mr Heron!....taken hand held with my Istds,he was sitting on top of a building so the blue behind is pure sky!..lol
The image quality is stunning, the image is pin sharp. But it was taken in bright daylight. I was wondering how much of a difference the 1/3 smaller aperture made in lesser light. Let's say in a situation needing f8 @ 1/25 to get a correct exposure.
And nobody said anything about the VC. How good is it?
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
Related Content
Join Our Free Newsletter
Awards
Current Competitions
Olympus 'Portraiture' Competition - Win £1000 Worth Of Gear!
30th April 2013 - 31st May 2013
This month, to celebrate the launch of Olympus' new micro site Olympus Image Space, Olympus are giving you the chance to win £1000 worth of Olympus gear!...
May's Photo Month
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
