I am going to Italy in the spring and I am tired of lugging around a backpack with 3+ lenses. I am considering an "all-in-one" lens for convenience and versatility. These are the 2 I am considering
Tamron AF 28-300 f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD VC costing about $625
Canon EF 28-300 F 3.5-5.6 L IS USM costing about $2500.
Which lens would you recommend? Is the Canon worth the price difference? Are there any other lenses worth consideration? Are the images satisfactory when compared to the more specific lenses that I usually carry ie. Canon 16-35, Canon 24-70, and Canon 70-200 IS 1:2.8. Thanks for any advice in helping me make this decision.
Well, the Canon's a huge hunk of glass to haul around. The Tammy's much more compact. IO'm sure the quality will be at least adequate for your needs, and the portability and price are both much better.
Well, the Canon's a huge hunk of glass to haul around. The Tammy's much more compact. IO'm sure the quality will be at least adequate for your needs, and the portability and price are both much better.
Yes. The weight of the Canon is a concern. Its a about the same as the 70-200 IS I am used to. It would be worth the strain if the images were significantly better but I am also concerned about walking around with such an expensive lens. I have been told to be concerned about theft.
I am also concerned about walking around with such an expensive lens. I have been told to be concerned about theft.
I'd be concerned too. I honestly don't see where such a heavy, expensive piece of glass is necessary just for this trip. The 50D and the Tammy would be worth what? $1100 total? Unless you're just plain sold on the idea of having that white lens long-term.
I hauled around the Bigma and the 28-75 Tammy on a trip to southern France. The long shots can be nice, but most of the time you want to capture the place and the people in that place. You don't need a long lens for that, in fact the 28 is often not wide enough. Last trip I took the Tammy and the Canon 10-22 and did not miss the long glass.
I personally would prefer the range of the Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 (although I'm not convinced about the lens' price). It would bug me to have a lens not wide enough for Italy's architecture.
Last trip I took the Tammy and the Canon 10-22 and did not miss the long glass.
same here (same two lenses), in fact i rarely used the Tammy as the Canon was used most of the time since i took lots of sweeping seascapes and architecture shots.
i switched the Tammy when i didn't need to be so wide or wanted some street shots or portraits.
Last trip I took the Tammy and the Canon 10-22 and did not miss the long glass.
same here (same two lenses), in fact i rarely used the Tammy as the Canon was used most of the time since i took lots of sweeping seascapes and architecture shots.
i switched the Tammy when i didn't need to be so wide or wanted some street shots or portraits.
Thank you. That gives me some other options to think about:)
Last trip I took the Tammy and the Canon 10-22 and did not miss the long glass.
same here (same two lenses), in fact i rarely used the Tammy as the Canon was used most of the time since i took lots of sweeping seascapes and architecture shots.
i switched the Tammy when i didn't need to be so wide or wanted some street shots or portraits.
Thank you. That gives me some other options to think about:)
if you are looking for an all in one, i would suggest as Urfa did the 18-270, as i dont think 28mm will cut it for you on a crop, unless you plan to do a lot of stitching later.
Last trip I took the Tammy and the Canon 10-22 and did not miss the long glass.
same here (same two lenses), in fact i rarely used the Tammy as the Canon was used most of the time since i took lots of sweeping seascapes and architecture shots.
i switched the Tammy when i didn't need to be so wide or wanted some street shots or portraits.
Thank you. That gives me some other options to think about:)
if you are looking for an all in one, i would suggest as Urfa did the 18-270, as i dont think 28mm will cut it for you on a crop, unless you plan to do a lot of stitching later.
I have the 18-270 and it's a great walk around lense.
My experience in Italy was that I almost always wanted wider, not longer lenses.
I was there for work, not holiday, but I did photograph plenty in my free time while I was there. My first trip, I took a DSLR and a bag of lenses. On subsequent trips I took my Canon G7. I'd advise to emphasize the wider end.
I don't know the Canon lens line, but like the others, in Italy, I'd want wider rather than longer. You're not going to need 300. Or even 200, frankly. But you will probably want 16 or 18.
I did several weeks in China with an 18-200. I used the long end exactly once. My main complaint about the 18-200 was that it was too slow, not that it was too short.
I concur with the wide recommendations... and 18mm isn't wide enough. The first time I was in Rome, my widest lens was the 18-55mm kit lens, and another mm or two would have made a huge difference. If I could only have one lens, it would be the 10-22mm even if that meant losing the long end. Your 16-35 would work in a pinch, and you might consider the compact 85mm f/1.8 for street shots and low light.
