Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Lens advise

Reply
Thread Tools

Lens advise

 
 
Joel Dorfan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2005
This type of question has been asked many times before and I have learnt a
great deal from the answers. However here is my situation.

I have bought a Canon 350D body only.
I have a Nikon 7900 7MP point and shoot whose results I have been very happy
with both closeup portrait and zoom while in the bush taking pics of wild
animals. I have used all of the available manual modes possible with this
camera.

I want to get one general purpose lens for the 350D and the one I am leaning
towards is the 18-200 from either Tamron or Sigma.
I have read much about the softness at various focal lengths, and slow speed
(6.3) at full zoom etc. etc.

Given the fact that the 7900 has produced decent results for me, is it safe
to assume that the 18-200's (even with the various reported problems)
attached to the 350D will far out perform anything that the 7900 can do
across the whole 18-200 spectrum?

My older 35mm EOS had the older model 28-105 lens which was OK although one
always could do with a bit extra zoom. Given this, the Canon 17-85 IS (lots
of CA, distortion and softness also reported) or the Tamron 24-135 would
also do the job very well but at $600 vs $400 for the 18-200 and $350 for
the 24-135 it seems like a no brainer to go for the 18-200 or 24-135.

I dont see myself as one to carry more than one lens.

Given the above, please help me settle on my ideal walk around lens.

Thanks

Joel



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
C Wright
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2005
On 8/11/05 10:52 AM, in article
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed), "Joel Dorfan"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> This type of question has been asked many times before and I have learnt a
> great deal from the answers. However here is my situation.
>
> I have bought a Canon 350D body only.
> I have a Nikon 7900 7MP point and shoot whose results I have been very happy
> with both closeup portrait and zoom while in the bush taking pics of wild
> animals. I have used all of the available manual modes possible with this
> camera.
>
> I want to get one general purpose lens for the 350D and the one I am leaning
> towards is the 18-200 from either Tamron or Sigma.
> I have read much about the softness at various focal lengths, and slow speed
> (6.3) at full zoom etc. etc.
>
> Given the fact that the 7900 has produced decent results for me, is it safe
> to assume that the 18-200's (even with the various reported problems)
> attached to the 350D will far out perform anything that the 7900 can do
> across the whole 18-200 spectrum?
>
> My older 35mm EOS had the older model 28-105 lens which was OK although one
> always could do with a bit extra zoom. Given this, the Canon 17-85 IS (lots
> of CA, distortion and softness also reported) or the Tamron 24-135 would
> also do the job very well but at $600 vs $400 for the 18-200 and $350 for
> the 24-135 it seems like a no brainer to go for the 18-200 or 24-135.
>
> I dont see myself as one to carry more than one lens.
>
> Given the above, please help me settle on my ideal walk around lens.
>
> Thanks
>
> Joel
>
>
>

IMO asking a lens, from any manufacturer, to go from a true wide-angle to a
true telephoto is asking too much! It will be soft at either the tele side
or the wide side, and probably both. You don't say what types of photos
that you prefer taking so it is difficult to make a recommendation but I
would go with either a wide to normal zoom if you tend to shoot more wide
angle shots or a normal to tele if you find you tend to the tele side.
If a lot of your shots are "people" shots I would lean toward the normal to
tele lenses.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Frank ess
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2005
C Wright wrote:
> On 8/11/05 10:52 AM, in article
> (E-Mail Removed), "Joel Dorfan"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> This type of question has been asked many times before and I have
>> learnt a great deal from the answers. However here is my situation.
>>
>> I have bought a Canon 350D body only.
>> I have a Nikon 7900 7MP point and shoot whose results I have been
>> very happy with both closeup portrait and zoom while in the bush
>> taking pics of wild animals. I have used all of the available
>> manual
>> modes possible with this camera.
>>
>> I want to get one general purpose lens for the 350D and the one I
>> am
>> leaning towards is the 18-200 from either Tamron or Sigma.
>> I have read much about the softness at various focal lengths, and
>> slow speed (6.3) at full zoom etc. etc.
>>
>> Given the fact that the 7900 has produced decent results for me, is
>> it safe to assume that the 18-200's (even with the various reported
>> problems) attached to the 350D will far out perform anything that
>> the 7900 can do across the whole 18-200 spectrum?
>>
>> My older 35mm EOS had the older model 28-105 lens which was OK
>> although one always could do with a bit extra zoom. Given this, the
>> Canon 17-85 IS (lots of CA, distortion and softness also reported)
>> or the Tamron 24-135 would also do the job very well but at $600 vs
>> $400 for the 18-200 and $350 for the 24-135 it seems like a no
>> brainer to go for the 18-200 or 24-135.
>>
>> I dont see myself as one to carry more than one lens.
>>
>> Given the above, please help me settle on my ideal walk around
>> lens.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Joel
>>
>>
>>

> IMO asking a lens, from any manufacturer, to go from a true
> wide-angle to a true telephoto is asking too much! It will be soft
> at either the tele side or the wide side, and probably both. You
> don't say what types of photos that you prefer taking so it is
> difficult to make a recommendation but I would go with either a wide
> to normal zoom if you tend to shoot more wide angle shots or a
> normal
> to tele if you find you tend to the tele side.
> If a lot of your shots are "people" shots I would lean toward the
> normal to tele lenses.


Why did you want to "move up" to a dSLR if you didn't want to carry
more than one lens?

Think about the area you wanted to step into by investing in an
expensive body, and buy a lens that will take you there. I presume it
was some deficiency in the CP7900's performance.

I can't imagine you just wanted to add an extra MP at that price.

--
Frank ess

 
Reply With Quote
 
Joel Dorfan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2005
Thanks for the input.
The 7900 belongs to work and I just have the use of it.

I understand the compromises of lenses with such wide ranges hence the
question relating to weather or not it would be better than the 7900.

I would did not buy DSLR for the extra MP but for many other reasons. The
fact is that I already have it and would like to make the best single lens
choice.

Joel

"Frank ess" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> C Wright wrote:
> > On 8/11/05 10:52 AM, in article
> > (E-Mail Removed), "Joel Dorfan"
> > <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> >> This type of question has been asked many times before and I have
> >> learnt a great deal from the answers. However here is my situation.
> >>
> >> I have bought a Canon 350D body only.
> >> I have a Nikon 7900 7MP point and shoot whose results I have been
> >> very happy with both closeup portrait and zoom while in the bush
> >> taking pics of wild animals. I have used all of the available
> >> manual
> >> modes possible with this camera.
> >>
> >> I want to get one general purpose lens for the 350D and the one I
> >> am
> >> leaning towards is the 18-200 from either Tamron or Sigma.
> >> I have read much about the softness at various focal lengths, and
> >> slow speed (6.3) at full zoom etc. etc.
> >>
> >> Given the fact that the 7900 has produced decent results for me, is
> >> it safe to assume that the 18-200's (even with the various reported
> >> problems) attached to the 350D will far out perform anything that
> >> the 7900 can do across the whole 18-200 spectrum?
> >>
> >> My older 35mm EOS had the older model 28-105 lens which was OK
> >> although one always could do with a bit extra zoom. Given this, the
> >> Canon 17-85 IS (lots of CA, distortion and softness also reported)
> >> or the Tamron 24-135 would also do the job very well but at $600 vs
> >> $400 for the 18-200 and $350 for the 24-135 it seems like a no
> >> brainer to go for the 18-200 or 24-135.
> >>
> >> I dont see myself as one to carry more than one lens.
> >>
> >> Given the above, please help me settle on my ideal walk around
> >> lens.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Joel
> >>
> >>
> >>

> > IMO asking a lens, from any manufacturer, to go from a true
> > wide-angle to a true telephoto is asking too much! It will be soft
> > at either the tele side or the wide side, and probably both. You
> > don't say what types of photos that you prefer taking so it is
> > difficult to make a recommendation but I would go with either a wide
> > to normal zoom if you tend to shoot more wide angle shots or a
> > normal
> > to tele if you find you tend to the tele side.
> > If a lot of your shots are "people" shots I would lean toward the
> > normal to tele lenses.

>
> Why did you want to "move up" to a dSLR if you didn't want to carry
> more than one lens?
>
> Think about the area you wanted to step into by investing in an
> expensive body, and buy a lens that will take you there. I presume it
> was some deficiency in the CP7900's performance.
>
> I can't imagine you just wanted to add an extra MP at that price.
>
> --
> Frank ess
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Frank ess
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2005
Joel Dorfan wrote:
> Thanks for the input.
> The 7900 belongs to work and I just have the use of it.
>
> I understand the compromises of lenses with such wide ranges hence
> the
> question relating to weather or not it would be better than the
> 7900.
>
> I would did not buy DSLR for the extra MP but for many other
> reasons.
> The fact is that I already have it and would like to make the best
> single lens choice.
>
> Joel
>


Aha.

List your "many other reasons" and see which lens most of them fit
into. You can bet not all of them will fit into any one of them.

Isn't buying a dSLR and not changing lenses kind of like buying a 4WD
pickup truck and never leaving the pavement or carrying a load?

Not that there is anything wrong with that.

--
Frank ess

> "Frank ess" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> C Wright wrote:
>>> On 8/11/05 10:52 AM, in article
>>> (E-Mail Removed), "Joel
>>> Dorfan"
>>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>
>>>> This type of question has been asked many times before and I have
>>>> learnt a great deal from the answers. However here is my
>>>> situation.
>>>>
>>>> I have bought a Canon 350D body only.
>>>> I have a Nikon 7900 7MP point and shoot whose results I have been
>>>> very happy with both closeup portrait and zoom while in the bush
>>>> taking pics of wild animals. I have used all of the available
>>>> manual
>>>> modes possible with this camera.
>>>>
>>>> I want to get one general purpose lens for the 350D and the one I
>>>> am
>>>> leaning towards is the 18-200 from either Tamron or Sigma.
>>>> I have read much about the softness at various focal lengths, and
>>>> slow speed (6.3) at full zoom etc. etc.
>>>>
>>>> Given the fact that the 7900 has produced decent results for me,
>>>> is
>>>> it safe to assume that the 18-200's (even with the various
>>>> reported
>>>> problems) attached to the 350D will far out perform anything that
>>>> the 7900 can do across the whole 18-200 spectrum?
>>>>
>>>> My older 35mm EOS had the older model 28-105 lens which was OK
>>>> although one always could do with a bit extra zoom. Given this,
>>>> the
>>>> Canon 17-85 IS (lots of CA, distortion and softness also
>>>> reported)
>>>> or the Tamron 24-135 would also do the job very well but at $600
>>>> vs
>>>> $400 for the 18-200 and $350 for the 24-135 it seems like a no
>>>> brainer to go for the 18-200 or 24-135.
>>>>
>>>> I dont see myself as one to carry more than one lens.
>>>>
>>>> Given the above, please help me settle on my ideal walk around
>>>> lens.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Joel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> IMO asking a lens, from any manufacturer, to go from a true
>>> wide-angle to a true telephoto is asking too much! It will be
>>> soft
>>> at either the tele side or the wide side, and probably both. You
>>> don't say what types of photos that you prefer taking so it is
>>> difficult to make a recommendation but I would go with either a
>>> wide
>>> to normal zoom if you tend to shoot more wide angle shots or a
>>> normal
>>> to tele if you find you tend to the tele side.
>>> If a lot of your shots are "people" shots I would lean toward the
>>> normal to tele lenses.

>>
>> Why did you want to "move up" to a dSLR if you didn't want to carry
>> more than one lens?
>>
>> Think about the area you wanted to step into by investing in an
>> expensive body, and buy a lens that will take you there. I presume
>> it
>> was some deficiency in the CP7900's performance.
>>
>> I can't imagine you just wanted to add an extra MP at that price.
>>
>> --
>> Frank ess



 
Reply With Quote
 
Robert R Kircher, Jr.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2005

"Joel Dorfan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> This type of question has been asked many times before and I have learnt a
> great deal from the answers. However here is my situation.
>
> I have bought a Canon 350D body only.
> I have a Nikon 7900 7MP point and shoot whose results I have been very
> happy
> with both closeup portrait and zoom while in the bush taking pics of wild
> animals. I have used all of the available manual modes possible with this
> camera.
>
> I want to get one general purpose lens for the 350D and the one I am
> leaning
> towards is the 18-200 from either Tamron or Sigma.
> I have read much about the softness at various focal lengths, and slow
> speed
> (6.3) at full zoom etc. etc.
>
> Given the fact that the 7900 has produced decent results for me, is it
> safe
> to assume that the 18-200's (even with the various reported problems)
> attached to the 350D will far out perform anything that the 7900 can do
> across the whole 18-200 spectrum?
>
> My older 35mm EOS had the older model 28-105 lens which was OK although
> one
> always could do with a bit extra zoom. Given this, the Canon 17-85 IS
> (lots
> of CA, distortion and softness also reported) or the Tamron 24-135 would
> also do the job very well but at $600 vs $400 for the 18-200 and $350 for
> the 24-135 it seems like a no brainer to go for the 18-200 or 24-135.
>
> I dont see myself as one to carry more than one lens.
>
> Given the above, please help me settle on my ideal walk around lens.
>



Joel,

I can't speak directly to the quality of the lenses you've mentioned but I
can say I've read enough opinions and reviews since I bought my 300D to feel
comfortable in suggesting that you pick up the canon EF 28-135 IS. It
doesn't cover the range that you're looking at but I think you'll find that
almost everyone of these lens threads gives this lens fairly high marks for
performance. It was the very first lens I bought and it very quickly
replaced the kit lens that came with my 300D. I've used the 18-55, the
28-90 and the 28-135 for my "walk around" lens and I can tell you that by
far the 28-135 meet my needs for range and quality.

Also keep in mind the old adage, "You get what you pay for." Unfortunately,
quality cost money. I bought a Sigma 70-300 when I bought my 300D (part of
the package) and I used it once. The images just plain sucked. Maybe there
are other Sigma lenses that are good but I personally don't think I'll
experiment with my money.

JMHO

--

Rob


 
Reply With Quote
 
CFB
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2005
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
"Frank ess" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Joel Dorfan wrote:
> > Thanks for the input.
> > The 7900 belongs to work and I just have the use of it.
> >
> > I understand the compromises of lenses with such wide ranges hence
> > the
> > question relating to weather or not it would be better than the
> > 7900.
> >
> > I would did not buy DSLR for the extra MP but for many other
> > reasons.
> > The fact is that I already have it and would like to make the best
> > single lens choice.
> >
> > Joel
> >

>
> Aha.
>
> List your "many other reasons" and see which lens most of them fit
> into. You can bet not all of them will fit into any one of them.
>
> Isn't buying a dSLR and not changing lenses kind of like buying a 4WD
> pickup truck and never leaving the pavement or carrying a load?
>
> Not that there is anything wrong with that.


People still don't realize the lens is more important than the camera.

--

http://home.nc.rr.com/christianbonanno/
 
Reply With Quote
 
Eatmorepies
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2005

> My older 35mm EOS had the older model 28-105 lens which was OK although
> one
> always could do with a bit extra zoom. Given this, the Canon 17-85 IS
> (lots
> of CA, distortion and softness also reported) or the Tamron 24-135 would
> also do the job very well but at $600 vs $400 for the 18-200 and $350 for
> the 24-135 it seems like a no brainer to go for the 18-200 or 24-135.
>
> I dont see myself as one to carry more than one lens.
>


As I tell anyone who listens - the lenses to buy are the L series. But they
are very expensive. When you see the results you can see why.

If you go to
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...s-Reviews.aspx

you can get lots of advice/reviews. I go with the 24 - 70 mm f2.8L as the
best walk round lens. Then look at a 70 - 200mm for a telephoto.

If you want an non-L (cheaper) lens then the 28-105 f3.5/4.5 is quite good
when stopped down to f5.6. But consider this; why buy and expensive body and
put a cheap lens on it? The lens is the most important bit.

John


 
Reply With Quote
 
(PeteCresswell)
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2005
Per Frank ess:
>Isn't buying a dSLR and not changing lenses kind of like buying a 4WD
>pickup truck and never leaving the pavement or carrying a load?


Lack of shutter lag is a pretty big thing to me.
--
PeteCresswell
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mike Warren
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-12-2005
Joel Dorfan wrote:
> I want to get one general purpose lens for the 350D and the one I am
> leaning towards is the 18-200 from either Tamron or Sigma.
> I have read much about the softness at various focal lengths, and
> slow speed (6.3) at full zoom etc. etc.
>
> Given the fact that the 7900 has produced decent results for me, is
> it safe to assume that the 18-200's (even with the various reported
> problems) attached to the 350D will far out perform anything that the
> 7900 can do across the whole 18-200 spectrum?


I don't recommend the mega zooms on a DSLR. I tried the
Tamron 18-200.

Here are some comparison shots with a Panasonic FZ20:

Tamron 18-200: Maximum wide angle, full frame reduced
http://web.aanet.com.au/miwa/Tamron1Full.jpg

Tamron 18-200: Maximum wide angle, partial Crop at 100%
http://web.aanet.com.au/miwa/Tamron1.jpg

Tamron 18-200: Maximum telephoto, full frame reduced
http://web.aanet.com.au/miwa/Tamron2Full.jpg

Tamron 18-200: Maximum telephoto, partial Crop at 100%
http://web.aanet.com.au/miwa/Tamron2.jpg

FZ20: Maximum wide angle, full frame reduced
http://web.aanet.com.au/miwa/FZ20aFull.jpg

FZ20: Maximum wide angle, partial Crop at 100%
http://web.aanet.com.au/miwa/FZ20a.jpg

FZ20: Maximum telephoto, full frame reduced
http://web.aanet.com.au/miwa/FZ20bFull.jpg

FZ20: Maximum telephoto, partial Crop at 100%
http://web.aanet.com.au/miwa/FZ20b.jpg

-Mike



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I NEED YOUR ADVISE--WHICH LENS SHOULD I CHOOSE?? cassia Digital Photography 6 04-03-2007 01:19 AM
Nikon lens advise sought go go dancer Digital Photography 8 02-18-2006 06:34 AM
Advise: Canon EOS 350D Zoom Lens Auto Focus Ritzy & Tony Digital Photography 9 05-09-2005 10:34 AM
Good everyday lens for Digital Rebel -- kit lens, 17-40mm f/4L, or...? Mike Kozlowski Digital Photography 5 12-30-2003 08:04 AM
Tamron lens *is* crap --> interesting lens comparison! Beowulf Digital Photography 12 08-24-2003 05:21 PM



Advertisments