Lens with big zoom range - DPChallenge Forums

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

05/17/2007 08:09:19 PM · #1

I nearly bought my dSLR today. At the last minute I started having doubts about the lens purchase. I had planned to start out using just the kit lens and then get a feel for what else I wanted. But as soon as I started thinking in terms of a day out to try out my new camera, I realised I would be lost with such a small zoom range and would have to take my Panasonic FZ5(35-420 zoom) with me, which seemed like a really bad idea.

So now I'm wondering - Sigma 18-200mm or Sigma 28-300mm? And if I buy the 18-200, should I still buy the kit lens or will it just be a waste of money? And is one lens better than the other when it comes to close-up capability? The 28-300mm lenses I've seen listed here don't seem to quite match the one I saw listed for sale at a local site, which is listed as a macro lens, though it's close focusing is 1:3. I read somewhere that Tamron 18-200mm has better macro capability than Sigma (but I'm not sure whether the shop I'm going to will have it). I haven't yet found any specifications for it as the site I consulted doesn't seem to keep Tamron. Is it a better bet for me if I can get it?

Ann

Olympus OM-D E-M1

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

05/17/2007 08:14:07 PM · #2

I forget...which body did you finally decide on?

05/17/2007 08:14:14 PM · #3

While the kit lens isnt exactly high quality, neither is a 250 dollar 28-200. Your gonna fine most people that have money for two lenses aren't gonna run around with a big zoom on it all day long.

I think you should break free of P&S for a bit once you get your slr.

Remember viewfinder only shooting, dont chimp between shots. Big zoom for everday shooting is a P&S thing. Its needed just not permanently. If your looking for a permanent superzoom that has live view, SLR's arent for all people. Thats another thread youve gone over and over thats cool.

You should come borrow my 1987 Canon AV-1 it has automatic shutter speed control and a 50mm Portrait lens. If you cant deal with that im not sure what ur gonna do lol.

05/17/2007 08:14:31 PM · #4

Originally posted by annpatt:

I forget...which body did you finally decide on?

I think she was going on the 400D.

Message edited by author 2007-05-17 20:14:39.

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

05/17/2007 08:23:48 PM · #5

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

Originally posted by annpatt:
I forget...which body did you finally decide on?

I think she was going on the 400D.

Yes, that's the one.

I know the lenses I'm talking about aren't the best quality, but they're certainly going to give better results than my Panasonic. The thing is that I don't want photography to become a chore and it might do that if I have to start carrying a bag of lenses around with me. (I've noticed some members here going back to P&S because they find their dSLRs too much to handle.) Also, I can't afford to buy everything I want at once and I certainly don't want to have to carry two cameras around.

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

05/17/2007 08:26:26 PM · #6

Well ill tell you this....

If your carrying your dSLR ALWAYS carry a P&S. (Your Panasonic is a bit of an exception) But having a pocket P&S will get you a shot youd miss pulling the DSLR out except on those days ur out to shoot not just dragging her along.

2 - Always have a backup camera... you might be careful but u dont have to break it... itll break itself for you.

Ann

Olympus OM-D E-M1

05/17/2007 08:26:36 PM · #7

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

I think she was going on the 400D.

Thanks, if it isn't all about me, I can't remember these things.

Anyway, I don't know much about lenses for Canon cameras, but my personal experience has been that cheap zoom lenses are a waste of money, and they're hard to sell after you get something better. If you have something specific you want to shoot right away, like wildlife or sports, then by all means, get whatever you can afford. But the price/performance ratio is much better for lenses with narrower zoom ranges (and *way* better for primes).

Personally, I'd get the camera with the kit lens, and spend a few weeks learning to use it first, before spending any more money.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

05/17/2007 08:32:04 PM · #8

ALso dont forget the minimum aperture. Many *-200 *-300's in an affordable price range will be F/4 maximum wide open aperture. I know the 55-200 USM (Have one on a Rebel T2) is F/4.

The kit lens will usually have an F/2.8 Max Aperture. Can create a shallower depth of field and itll provide better low light shooting in doors.

JenniferDavidGA

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

05/17/2007 08:32:59 PM · #9

I would get the 18-200. I have been looking at that lense for a while now. It has a great range for everyday. The kit lense is ok but since it only goes to 55mm you are pretty limited. To me the 18-200 would give a perfect range for everyday shooting. To start out with it would make a great lens. You wouldn't have to worry about switching lenses all the time, plus you wouldn't have to buy more then one lens at first. If I could do it all over agian I would save the 100$ and put it towards the 18-200.

Ann

Olympus OM-D E-M1

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

05/17/2007 08:35:06 PM · #10

Originally posted by GinaRothfels:

The thing is that I don't want photography to become a chore and it might do that if I have to start carrying a bag of lenses around with me.

I certainly don't know about everyone, but most of the DSLR owners I know who have a bag full of lenses don't bring all of their lenses with them on a shoot. Generally, I'll think about where I'm going and what I'm likely to encounter, and only bring the lenses I think I'm going to use. Occasionally I'll get surprised, but generally I can make do with something I brought.

The exception is this weekend, where I'm taking a "nature photography" workshop. I've already been told we're going to shoot landscapes, macros, and wildlife. All in one day. So I'm going to need practically every lens I have, plus my tripod. And a sherpa to carry everything.

I don't even own a big enough bag to carry all that stuff.

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

05/17/2007 08:36:50 PM · #11

RainMotorsports I plan to carry my Pentax W10 with me as well for just that reason. I often take photos out of the car when stopped at a red light and I can't see myself managing that with a dSLR.

annpatt I can't see myself managing with just the kit lens. There are some distant places I've been putting off going to until I get the dSLR, and I know that lens won't get me the shots I want. Ultimately I will have to get other lenses for specific purposes, but I'm not ready to make a decision on those just yet.

I've seen some pretty good results here with 18-200mm lenses, less so with 28-300mm. I presume the quality can't be worse than the kit lens. Or am I wrong?

Message edited by author 2007-05-17 20:46:40.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

05/17/2007 08:38:33 PM · #12

W10 is good its the water resistant version of the M10. I spent some time with the M10. Perfect pocket cam with no manual functions.

BTW with user tags u put the actual username. Like

GinaRothfels

ANd you could be wrong. The -200's will show corner softness on the telephoto lens and of course the -300 will be worse in this aspect. AT wide angle both will also barrel distort but probably not worse then your P&S.

Soft corners can probly be made up for better then zoom cropping a shot with the kit lens lol.

Message edited by author 2007-05-17 20:42:32.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

05/17/2007 08:40:52 PM · #13

Tamron has a new 18-250mm that's getting pretty good reviews.

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

05/17/2007 08:43:05 PM · #14

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

Actually the kit lens appears to be F3.5 same as on the other lenses I mentioned, thought the 55-200 does offer a better option there. At this stage I'd really prefer to stick to one lens if I'm limited to 200mm anyway.

Thanks for the comment about tags. I meant to preview first but forgot. I'll go back and fix them.

05/17/2007 08:45:21 PM · #15

Not sure what you meant but the 55-200 is worse as far as versatility. rather have F/3.5 max then F/4. ANd taking pictures at 55mm? 5 feet away and i cant get a shot of the full rear of the car lol.

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

05/17/2007 08:49:31 PM · #16

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

Not sure what you meant but the 55-200 is worse as far as versatility. rather have F/3.5 max then F/4. ANd taking pictures at 55mm? 5 feet away and i cant get a shot of the full rear of the car lol.

Sorry, I was referring to aperture being better than the 18-200 or 28-300 at tele end. I certainly wouldn't be happy travelling with only the 55-200.

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

05/17/2007 08:50:54 PM · #17

Originally posted by scalvert:

Tamron has a new 18-250mm that's getting pretty good reviews.

Thanks. I'll have to see if that one is available. Certainly nobody here seems to have one yet.

SamDoe1

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

05/17/2007 08:51:19 PM · #18

What's your budget for a new lens? I know Canon makes a 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L lens, but it comes at a hefty price. The Sigma and Tamron are probably going to be your best bet for that range at a decent price though. If you don't want or need to go to 200mm+, the Canon 28-135mm IS is a decent choice as well.

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

05/17/2007 09:01:11 PM · #19

Originally posted by SamDoe1:

I seriously doubt I would be able to afford L glass. I was given a quote for Canon 28-300L with stabiliser (the guy quoted on the wrong lens - one of many mistakes he made) and it's about three times the price of the camera. In any case I can't buy anything expensive just yet and even if I could, I wouldn't do so until I was sure I was happy with the camera.

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

05/17/2007 09:56:01 PM · #20

Looking through lens profiles here, I've noticed higher scores with the 18-200 than 28-300. Presumably that means that better photographers prefer the 18-200. I notice that

roz has Tamron 18-200 listed as the only lens in her profile, yet her stuff is awesome. I wish she was online now so that I could discuss the lens with her, but I'll have to take her profile as a recommendation. If I can get it, that would probably be a good lens to start with.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

05/17/2007 10:18:21 PM · #21

Note that Tamron's 18-250 that I mentioned earlier is based on (and outperforms) their older 18-200.

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

05/17/2007 10:29:19 PM · #22

Originally posted by scalvert:

Note that Tamron's 18-250 that I mentioned earlier is based on (and outperforms) their older 18-200.

Sounds good, but it's more expensive than the 18-200 and I've not been able to find any evidence that it's available in South Africa. I will certainly ask when I'm at the shop though.

The Tamrons do seem to be more expensive than the comparable Sigmas - is this a sign of better quality or doesn't it mean anything?

05/17/2007 10:30:29 PM · #23

Is there a Canon Service center in South Africa if not i wouldn't buy it the camera anyways!

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

05/17/2007 10:37:09 PM · #24

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

Is there a Canon Service center in South Africa if not i wouldn't buy it the camera anyways!

I imagine there is. Not much I can do if it has to be sent away though, because the problem would probably apply to most makes then. All the people I know who have dSLRs seem to have Canon anyway.

Edit (a day later): Yes, there is a service centre about 15 minutes drive from where I bought the camera, so no problems there.

Message edited by author 2007-05-18 20:20:40.