Zoom Lens Decision? Don't know which to buy!

[parrotmomma]

deleted

[Tom]

If you are just wanting a vacation snapshot lens, either will work fine.

[toverman]

I don't see spending the money equaling a serious upgrade in quality from your two kit lenses. Typically, when a zoom lens goes from wide to long, there are often compromises in the optics (and they are usually heavier, slower to focus). To me, it would be a step backward to replace two kit lenses with one lens of equally questionable quality.

How are the kit lenses limiting you in some way? If they aren't by much, keep using them.

[mmuhlenkamp]

The 18-270 has VC (Vibration Compenstation) which is what you would be paying extra for. If you're finding yourself taking photos at slow shutter speeds that suffer from camera shake it would be helpful, otherwise save your money and get the 18-250 (20mm doesn't make that much difference on the long end).

Good luck on your decision.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by toverman

I don't see spending the money equaling a serious upgrade in quality from your two kit lenses. Typically, when a zoom lens goes from wide to long, there are often compromises in the optics (and they are usually heavier, slower to focus). To me, it would be a step backward to replace two kit lenses with one lens of equally questionable quality.

How are the kit lenses limiting you in some way? If they aren't by much, keep using them.

Yeah, but the kit lenses aren't exactly the best optical quality. The cheapie superzooms probably deliver similar image quality, but with only one lens to carry. I totally see the usefulness of that for mom and dad on a trip, but I would sure never own one.

[High_Boost]

I agree with mmuhlenkamp..
you will not notice the differance in 270 vs 250, but the VC is a big differance.. if you are set on an all in one, spend the extra money - it is the best choice - pretty good optics, great range, and vc

p.s. - I used to have the 18-270, and I did prefer it over the kit lenses, but I ended up selling it because I wanted the sharper optics of the tamron 17-50 more than I wanted an all in one vacation lens, and I couldnt afford both

the only thing that takes a little getting used to on it is when the vc kicks in, the image kinda jumps around a lot more than on a canon is lens, but it isnt that big of a deal

[toverman]

Originally Posted by Thomas Campbell

Yeah, but the kit lenses aren't exactly the best optical quality. The cheapie superzooms probably deliver similar image quality, but with only one lens to carry. I totally see the usefulness of that for mom and dad on a trip, but I would sure never own one.

Agreed.

But she mentions being on a budget, so using what you have is my motto in that situation. I live that every day!

[parrotmomma]

Thanks for the advice so far. The primary reason for wanting an all in one lens is that it is becoming a bit of a hassle to constantly change lenses. We went to the Hill Country this weekend, and I must have changed between the two lenses a half dozen times. It means lugging the camera bag on hikes (like to the top of Enchanted Rock) and frankly, my shoulder is starting to hurt. My budget would be ok for the $600. lens, but wondered if the 350. would do. I was missing the point that the 18-270 had the VC.

[revjvegas]

Tamron has a $50 rebate going on right now for that 18-270 VC lens if that's the one you want.

[elan]

Some review said the Tamron has slow foucsing in low-light issues and the Sigma perform a little better. You might want to take a look on this one Amazon.com: Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM IF Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

TIPA AWARDS 2009:Best Entry Level Lens: Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM

[rfortson]

I have the 18-250 and it's basically the same as two decent kit lenses. Image quality is fine, but there are some compromises (barrel distortion at the wide end and vignetting wide open). Both can be easily fixed in PP, if necessary. Depending on the subject, you may never see it.

I use it as my travel lens when I don't want to constantly change lenses. As for the quality of the images, the only shots I've ever sold (and I don't market my shots) were taken with this lens, including a magazine cover shot. Unless you're making museum prints, save your money for your vacations. Can you see the difference between it and higher quality lenses? Yes, if you zoom or print large enough. Otherwise, you really won't notice it.

Didn't realize there was a big price difference for the VC. I use mine on a Pentax so I don't need the VC (not even available). Stabilization does come in handy since the lens isn't very fast. The stabilization can help with low light shots of stationary subjects.

[Tom]

I use mine on a Pentax so I don't need the VC

The Pentax in-camera stabilization is pretty ineffective at longer focal lengths because the sensor would have to move much further than it is possible to move.

[rfortson]

Originally Posted by Thomas Campbell

The Pentax in-camera stabilization is pretty ineffective at longer focal lengths because the sensor would have to move much further than it is possible to move.

Nah, it works fine. Yes the sensor moves more for longer focal lengths. That's why it either reads the focal length from a current lens, or you input a focal length for the older lenses. The best part for me is only paying for it once.

[jtriron]

Originally Posted by parrotmomma

Thanks for the advice so far. The primary reason for wanting an all in one lens is that it is becoming a bit of a hassle to constantly change lenses. We went to the Hill Country this weekend, and I must have changed between the two lenses a half dozen times. It means lugging the camera bag on hikes (like to the top of Enchanted Rock) and frankly, my shoulder is starting to hurt. My budget would be ok for the $600. lens, but wondered if the 350. would do. I was missing the point that the 18-270 had the VC.

And changing lenses that many times in the field leads to a higher chance of a dirty sensor, ( I made 1 lens change on the Galveston seawall, it was quick and I did my best to shield the equipment from the wind, // needed to have my sensor cleaned the following week)
Just my .02

[Tom]

Originally Posted by rfortson

Nah, it works fine. Yes the sensor moves more for longer focal lengths. That's why it either reads the focal length from a current lens, or you input a focal length for the older lenses. The best part for me is only paying for it once.

The DX-sized sensor can only move a maximum of 5mm. When using longer than a 200mm lens, the compensation needs to be more than that.

Also, in-camera IS does not work if you are trying to do panning shots - you are supposed to turn it off, where the in-lens IS can help you with panning shots.

Still, it is very handy to have IS in all your wide-normal lenses for most shooters. Canon doesn't have IS in anything wider than the 24-105. But then again, some photographers are able to hand hold stuff very slow at wide angles.