Thread: which lens?
View Single Post
      11-07-2013, 02:18 PM   #19
Second Lieutenant

Drives: 2018 G30 M550i
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NYC

iTrader: (0)

Originally Posted by dcstep View Post
Then go with the 18-200mm to cover everything you're likely to encounter. Going over 200mm is really a "specialty" lens that'll you'll not need unless you get big into nature photography.


agreed on the >200 range.

One thing though, if you settle on a superzoom, do not get the canon version. It is not only expensive and crappy (optically), it employs and old autofocus motor that is noisy and a little slow.

Originally Posted by khaye1 View Post
the suggestions in here are all over the place. I'm not great at photography but I do get lucky every now and then. The fact is, there's a lens for every job...18-200/55-250 are okay at best. For the money, yes they will do just fine but ask the guys that are in this thread and some of them invested a small fortune on gear. If you think you'll be keeping up with the hobby then invest in nice glass. They keep their value, so you can sell if you decide it's not for you.

Here's another option for doesn't cover as much as the 18-200 but look into the 24-105 F4L. The image and build quality is far superior than the 18-200. If you want the reach at the telephoto end just stack in TC. They can be had for less than $700
I like the general usability of the 24-105, but if on a budget an off brand (not necessarily a bad thing) lens is also a good alternative. Just realized that 24 on a crop is not actually that wide 38.2 on the wide end (which is find for some) may not be wide enough for your tastes and even feel a little cramped indoors. The sigma 17-50 f/2.8 or the tamron 17-50 f/2.8 aren't bad at all. they are both image stabilized lenses that go for 500 bucks or less. Both have a constant aperture of 2.8 and a useful focal length equivalent to 27-70mm on your crop camera.

Where they lack versatility on the longer end of the zoom range, they make up for in image quality and versatility in how you want your photo to look. The f/2.8 will get you more control over depth of field, and perform much better in low light than the super zooms, providing as much as 2-4x the light gathering capabilities and generally better sharpness when stopped down.