so its the same here ma.. you give me a 70-200 f2.8 oso useless cos i still can't produce stunning photos. but land in the hand of a better photographer its different story liao right
Hmmm if the PZD is out of your budget you could consider trying out its older brother the non-PZD version. Try a post at the B&S section to see if anyone is willing to let it go at a reasonable price.
Alternatively, you could rent the lenses and try it out for yourself before buying one. However, I could only find the sigma 18-200 and 70-300.
Another rental site - Camera Rental
Do note the location of the service centre for tamron. It's not at a very convenient place and they open during weekdays office hours. Kenna once force take one day leave for repair and almost need to take another day to collect.. Luckily they do courier lens back to owner, owner bears the shipping fee though...
I'm sori if it sounds lecture to some but to me it's a fact some just wouln't admit
Anyway i'm not qualified to lecture anybody out there as my photography sucks lol and i will still want to go for the best hoping that the equipment will bring my lvl up lol
Hey Anson. I am familiar with your work, and they are impressive. It is just that I have certain preferences yeah.Originally Posted by Anson
I started out with a Tamron 28-200mm and that little thing got me several winning pictures, which I am certainly proud of. There are flaws though, when viewed closely. I really don't pixel peep, but the better lenses really shows the difference, if you know where to look.
Originally Posted by phoeniix
Cool.. thanks for the great info
Ooohhh that doesnt sound friendly at all... i do hope Tamron lenses are trouble freeOriginally Posted by Cowseye
Every lens have it's strong points and it's flaws as well, it's up to the photographers to work around the shortcomings to maximum the equipment at hand.
Using a prime 85 on a beautiful model posing in front of a sport car, lighted by 3 strobes mounted in softbox & snoot, a shot below would be easily achievable. But what the fun of photography without some challenge?
btw, A superzoom like 18-2xx is definitely great for travels. 55-250 is abit to tight for my normal walkaround...but it's OK when I go for close-ups, but as of recent, my Sigma 17-50 is getting more showtime than my 55-250 in close up shots.
Glad you think that way. Enjoy!Originally Posted by Anson
Hi. Sorry I missed this earlier.Originally Posted by aleow
Going for a 2 lens setup (kit lens plus dedicated telephoto zoom) is probably cheaper. As for dust going in, I am not the sort that gets bothered by it. Can't remember if the 1100D has sensor cleaning function, but mine has and that's good enough for me.
Either way, it really isn't a make or break situation.
I started with a Tamron 28-200, an all in one zoom. I later switched to a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and Nikon 70-300mm G lens combo. Decided that the telephoto wasn't that great and swapped it for a Nikon 55-200mm VR. I held this combo for a long while before acquiring better lenses.
Even though the lenses weren't the best, it did get the job done. Of course, when I evaluate my photos now, I know where the technical shortcomings are.
So really, I'd say get what you feel most comfortable with - which apparently is an all in one zoom.
Just stay happy yeah!
TS, if you want a single travel lens setup, and not a pixel-peeper, Just buy either the canon efs18-200 or the tamron 18-270 pzd, then sell your 18-55 on B&S. Don't read too much of reviews, both will produce results that looks about the same when you upload on facebook
dun bother to consider the 28-300mm, as 28mm is not wide at all on a crop frame camera.
Do understand that at such wide a range, there are limitations to what the lens can do. But there will be many great photos if you are able to fully understand how to maximise it potential on your 1100D
honestly, if you think that by getting a 18-2XX zoom lens, you will be able to capture fast moving wild animals eg dolphin, you will be sorely disappointed. Most of the time, it will just be blur pictures. There is the camera body and the interaction between the camera and lens to consider.
That is why professional wildlife photographer needs to carry large fast prime telephoto lenses, high-speed camera, filters, tripod, gimbal heads, etc etc. and out of thousands of photos, only a few can be natGeo stuff.
But there is always luck, being at the right place at the right time, capturing the exact moment properly. However, you can be garantee that the 18-2XX lens will help you take great pics of landscape, buildings, and slower things.
my 2 cents worth.
Everyone needs some luck occasionally! Quite true!Originally Posted by tikiman
thank you all so very much i really appreciate it
I had used the 18-200 initially but found the distortion unbearable for me and sold it off.
Then I found the 18-135 which has less distortion and I used t. Picture quality is identical for both.
Frankly the 135 vs 200mm isn't as big a difference than u think.
Used 18-135 can be had for abt $300,