Another lens question

[PaulaSG]

I'll preface my question by saying that I'm no expert on photography - I've got a Canon xti. I want to get an everyday lens to replace my kit lens and was wondering if the Tamron AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 was a good option? I'd love to hear some opinions from you more knowledgeable folks! I've found it for ~$299 on Amazon which seems like a good deal, or is it?

Thanks in advance!

[Britgirl]

I used to have a sigma lens and I loved it... until I got to try the Canon version of a similar lens. it was twice as sharp, and just... better. So I know ten people will come along and say they LOVE their tamron or sigma lens - and maybe some are awesome, I did only have one - but now I choose to save for the Canon version of whatever. just my thoughts for you
That said I have often got secondhand lenses and been delighted, so dont just search new. make sure you search google for 'the lens youre thinking of reviews' so you see what LOTS of different types of photographers think of it.
All a matter of personal taste and cost in the end.

[PaulaSG]

Thanks Mel - I get what you are saying. I'm such a amateur photographer (newbie doesn't sound right, I've been at it a while, I'm just not very good!!), that I don't feel comfortable spending the extra $$$ on a lens.

[dugarner]

Paula, even if you don't make money on photography, you can still appreciate and recognize craftsmanship! . . . I'm not an Olympic gymnast, in fact, I can't do a backbend, but I can watch competitions and I can critique and tell you what sets the best competitor in the world apart from the next-best. So don't discount your eye or your ability!

If the higher-$$$ lens isn't in your budget, go for the lower-priced one. That said, with lenses, you really do get what you pay for. $299 is a pretty good deal for a long lens, but I don't know how much staying power the Tamron has. They typically don't perform as well or hold up as well, either. My long lens (75-300) is a low-end Sony (really considered a kit lens) and normally costs about that much ($299) and is rather a piece of junk. It gets what I need, but it's slow, takes forever to gather light and autofocus, and has horrendous chromatic aberration. If I had the extra $1000 or so to buy a better lens, I sure would.

But if you're in the market for the $299 and you need it, I'd go ahead and get it.

If not having the lens is holding you back from taking the pictures you want, then get it.

If you have a little more you can spend, I'd upgrade.

Being a hobbyist doesn't discount you from being able to skillfully use more expensive equipment! Quite the opposite, the more expensive lens will give you more support and be more forgiving.

That didn't help a bit, did it?

[iUma]

The more expensive lens will MAKE you HAVE to be a better photographer!! Right?
That is the way my investment policy has worked.

I say go to a real camera store and try several so you can educate your eye about what the differences are. Take your own camera and try out the various lens and keep notes as to which lens is which picture (hey, take a photo of the lens before you switch it on to your camera!) then go home and put them on your computer and THEN decide what you can rationalize!!

Long term investment..... parcel the cost over ten years in your mind cause a really good lens will last a lot longer than that and capture your life while it is doing it.

LEt us know what you decide.

eta...of course you see what I am using here in the avatar.... the iPhone!!

[esther_a]

My 75-300 Canon kit lens is rubbish. I guess it's worth about $200. If I zoom any further than 150 my images are so blurry distorted that it is pointless. My Tamron 28-75 2.8 lens is terrific. It was about $500. I read reviews online - in particular at Digital Cameras: Digital Photography Review, News, Reviews, Forums, FAQ where they have detailed analysis of lens distortion etc. From that I decided that I was not sacrificing too much in quality for a much lower price.
The other thing I like to consider is the size and weight. Good luck with your hunt - I'll be interested to see what you decide!

[PaulaSG]

Thanks everyone. I appreciate all the advice. I'm torn! I think need a buddy to go to a camera store with me...anybody up for a trip to MA?

[anke]

I have the Tamron 18-270mm 3.5-6.3. It's not a bad lens as long as you are shooting outside. In fact I took it to Hershey yesterday because I didn't want to take the risk of bringing my good Nikon lens. It performs fairly well, some distortion on the zoom, the focus can be slow at times and of course the aperature being what it is, you need tons of light for it. I would always follow Randy's advice now and always buy the good glass if I can.
If you can find a good Tamron with a fixed aperature, it would probably be okay... it all depends on what you want to use it for too.

[PaulaSG]

Thanks Anke -- I'm looking for something to replace the kit lens, something to use both indoors and out.

[Jen D]

Even if you don't consider yourself to be the best photographer everyone always improves with time. With that in mind... lens last FOREVER. Especially a good one. So, my suggestion is buy the best you can because no matter what your skill level you will want more from it eventually.

I am also with Mel in buying a used lens. My 50mm 1.2 is a really expensive lens and I saved about 600.00 buying it used at Adorama. The lens is in perfect condition and looks and performs like new. And, it blows the doors off of the 50mm 1.4 cheapy I had before it

[Standifg]

Paula, you may want to think about renting before you invest your money. Once you rent a good lens you will know what you want. I rented 2 in Dec .. Canon 28-70mm f2.8L and Canon 200mm f2.8L ... I decided the 28-70 was just too heavy but I loved the 200mm for sports and birds so I saved the money and got a great deal on a used one off eBay. The only reason I used eBay for such a large purchase was the guy had a return policy, I wouldn't buy a used lens off eBay without a return policy. I now have 2 other ones reserved for July to see what my next purchase "might" be ... Canon 24-105 f4L IS and Canon 70-300 f4.5-5.6 DO IS. I rent them for at least a week so I can really put them to the test and get a feel for what I like and don't like. I rent with Lensrentals.com out of Cordova, TN but there are others out there as well. Shoot me a PM if you have any questions about renting.

[PaulaSG]

Thanks for all the tips! I will definitely look into renting. I think the Tamron 28-75 2.8 lens that Esther mentioned might be what I had in mind so I'll see if I can try that one out.

Thanks again everyone!

[Myra]

The 28-75 f2.8 cannot be beat. I have an Olympus version, and it is on my camera 75% of the time. It makes the most of low light. A f3.5 will not satisfy you if you want to get beyond a kit lens, imho. You won't believe how it will change your photography. It has give me incredible creative space because I can go wide, yet zoom close enough that I'm still getting a tight shot. But the light availability is the most important part of this lens. Don't underestimate the light.

This is the lens you can use to get shots of your kids playing in their rooms at night - with no flash. Or at dusk when it should be too dark to shoot. Or capture the ambiance of your Christmas tree. Or just shoot action in the sunlight outdoors. And the light will be incredible. If you want a serious upgrade that will give you the most incredible flexibility, save your pennies. It's worth it.

[esther_a]

Paula, it's a great everyday lens. I sought advice here, too, and that was the focal length and aperture that many mentioned they had permanently on their cameras. I love it, too. It's no good as a zoom, though. I need a zoom.
I bought my first lens from bhphotovideo and maintain a wishlist there There are so many different lenses - without my wishlist I'd get so confused! These are a couple of zoom lenses on my wish list:

• Canon Telephoto EF 135mm f/2.0L USM Autofocus Lens ($1,029.00). A friend recommended this prime lens as an economical option for a zoom. He uses it to take portraits in crowds.
• Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro AF Lens for Canon EOS DSLR Cameras ($769). That gives you the f/2.8 at an economical price, but it wouldn't be as good as the Canon equivalent.

But even 200mm is not a big zoom...