What lens range should i get?


Status
Not open for further replies.

andrewant

New Member
Sep 1, 2007
91
0
0
#1
Hey, i have a canon 18-55mm lens and am planning to buy another lens. I use zoom on a reasonably high percentage. im considering between a 70-300mm (sigma). And a 28-250mm (tamron) The lazy part of me says the tamron as i won't have to change lens that ofter, but quality and focus wise, the 70-300 is better. What would you pros do?
thanks! :)
 

Snoweagle

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2005
14,002
0
0
Pasir Ris, Singapore
#2
Hey, i have a canon 18-55mm lens and am planning to buy another lens. I use zoom on a reasonably high percentage. im considering between a 70-300mm (sigma). And a 28-250mm (tamron) The lazy part of me says the tamron as i won't have to change lens that ofter, but quality and focus wise, the 70-300 is better. What would you pros do?
thanks! :)
The Tamron one u're referring to should be 18-250. Do remember this, the more zoom, the more that image quality will be compromised. If i really want just a lens to cover most of the ranges without having to change it, i'll just take the Tamron 18-250 for a 1.6x body or the 28-300 VC for FF body for budget spending.
 

giantcanopy

Senior Member
Feb 11, 2007
6,232
2
0
SG
#3
Hey, i have a canon 18-55mm lens and am planning to buy another lens. I use zoom on a reasonably high percentage. im considering between a 70-300mm (sigma). And a 28-250mm (tamron) The lazy part of me says the tamron as i won't have to change lens that ofter, but quality and focus wise, the 70-300 is better. What would you pros do?
thanks! :)
Not a pro and never used either, but i am interested to know if the IQ difference that visible ? Ryan
 

monktian

New Member
May 1, 2008
65
0
0
#4
The Tamron one u're referring to should be 18-250. Do remember this, the more zoom, the more that image quality will be compromised. If i really want just a lens to cover most of the ranges without having to change it, i'll just take the Tamron 18-250 for a 1.6x body or the 28-300 VC for FF body for budget spending.
18-250 is a good walkaround lens though. Especially recommended for travel.:)
 

andrewant

New Member
Sep 1, 2007
91
0
0
#5
thanks for all your replies guys!
well the upside of getting a 70-300 is better quality, and cheaper. downside, gotta change lens.
Upside of 18-250, dont have to change lens. Downside, expensive and quality isnt that good.

ill think about it, thanks anw guys!
 

yehosaphat

Senior Member
Oct 28, 2005
2,703
0
0
North
#7
24-105mm is another good set of lens to get for focal range and if you have the $$
 

monktian

New Member
May 1, 2008
65
0
0
#9
thanks for all your replies guys!
well the upside of getting a 70-300 is better quality, and cheaper. downside, gotta change lens.
Upside of 18-250, dont have to change lens. Downside, expensive and quality isnt that good.

ill think about it, thanks anw guys!
How often do you change lens when travelling? Is it safe to do that? Pardon me for asking because I am quite paranoid when it comes to dust. :(

Is there any tactics or tips to observe when changing lens out in the open?
 

andrewant

New Member
Sep 1, 2007
91
0
0
#10
thanks for all the replies again! but how much does the 24-105mm cost? and the28-300L

Monktian: I'm using a 40D, so my sensor "cleans by itself" in terms of dust specs. As for the lens, i usually uncap the attachment part in my bag and face it down when attaching.
 

Snoweagle

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2005
14,002
0
0
Pasir Ris, Singapore
#11
thanks for all the replies again! but how much does the 24-105mm cost? and the28-300L

Monktian: I'm using a 40D, so my sensor "cleans by itself" in terms of dust specs. As for the lens, i usually uncap the attachment part in my bag and face it down when attaching.
The 24-105 is around $1.6K and the 28-300 around $3.2K.
 

ahbian

Senior Member
May 23, 2006
2,467
0
0
#12
For the price of the 28-300, you can actually get a 70-200mm F4 IS plus a 10-22mm plus cash left over. Both these lenses have really good IQ.

However, my suggestion goes against your aim of having a "lens to cover all the range", so please ignore if it its not suitable.
 

Snoweagle

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2005
14,002
0
0
Pasir Ris, Singapore
#13
For the price of the 28-300, you can actually get a 70-200mm F4 IS plus a 10-22mm plus cash left over. Both these lenses have really good IQ.

However, my suggestion goes against your aim of having a "lens to cover all the range", so please ignore if it its not suitable.
Yes u get flexibility but compromise on image quality.
 

AsPiRiN92

New Member
Mar 13, 2007
122
0
0
Toa Payoh
#14
i'd get the 70-200. the tamron takes too long to focus and quality isn't too impressive either
 

sytan81

New Member
Mar 13, 2008
196
0
0
Yio Chu Kang
#15
For the casual photographer, I believe that the 18-250mm is the most suitable. Very good reviews have been mentioned about the sharpness and quality (I refer to the Sony A-mount). While it may not be very sharp on larger apertures, it does so if you go 1 or 2 stops down. And since I take mainly landscape and portraits with still subjects, I find no issues going down to f8-11. For night shots, I use a tripod or flash or my cheap F2.8.

If you are gonna use a lot of zoom, you shld be using tripods as well (no matter what lens you get). Incidentally, this will let you stop down on the 18-250mm for better sharpness and image quality that would not differ much from the 70-300mm.

The best way is to go test out both lenses and compare their image qualities. For the casual photographer like myself, the difference don't matter much. In this case, I'd choose more convenience (in terms of lens changing and the overall weight) over minute improvements in quality.
 

#16
Hey, i have a canon 18-55mm lens and am planning to buy another lens. I use zoom on a reasonably high percentage. im considering between a 70-300mm (sigma). And a 28-250mm (tamron) The lazy part of me says the tamron as i won't have to change lens that ofter, but quality and focus wise, the 70-300 is better. What would you pros do?
thanks! :)
My personal preference would be the Sigma 70-300mm. Sharp lens, not too heavy and also very affordable. Used to own one but sold it away cos I dun utilize that zoom range often. Besides you already have a 18-55mm, why duplicate that range? Unless you are concerned about lugging too much equipment around then the Tamrom 18-250 would be a better choice.
 

andrewant

New Member
Sep 1, 2007
91
0
0
#18
hey everyone! sorry i can't address your suggestions and comments one by one. I read through all of them and they were ALL very useful :) thanks loads guys! and one girl.
I've decided to get the 70-200L lens. really good quality.

cheers! :)
 

fabianaino

Deregistered
Nov 19, 2007
1,454
0
0
43
Orchard
#19
get the IS version ... it will comes in very handy for the price that you pay
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom