i just ebay-ed my new camera today: a canon 350D ! *hurray*
now i need your help guys
this summer i will go to iceland and then want to start a little travelling through europe. but i don't want to waste so much space of my backpack only for my camera stuff so i'm looking for a (not so expensive) lense, that includes the whole focal length area (18-200 or 28-300...?)
so which one would you recommend?
thx in advance ;)
I had the Tamron 18-200mm Di II and it's an ok lens. It's nice not having to switch lens. But it is very limited. It is soft on each end and does have fringing. If you are look to take pictures for your scrapbook, its ok. But if you are look for good quality images, the kind you can frame, then go with the Tamron 28-75. It's in the same price range.
I'd sugest two smaller lens. You'll sacrafice a lot of quality or ability to get one "do-all" lens.
Maybe the Canon 17-40F4L, or 24-70F2.8L (or similar non-canon lens in this range) for general and landscape use and the Sigma 70-300 APO DG for telephoto and macro use. I use this set up when hiking. I looked at the 18-200 and thought it sacraficed too much quality and I looked at the 28-300 and it was just too big, heavy and expensive.
I'm holding out for the 15-500mm F2.8 L with no distortion, is the same size and weight as the 50mm F1.8 and takes tack sharp photos through out the range before I go to one do-all lens.
Kev upstairs has the right answer. The Canon 28-135 has IS and that is a great help in all light conditions. It takes 72mm filters so be sure to get a UV filter and a circular polarizer. You will not regret this lens.
