travel lens and polarizer ?s

[esdramaqueen]

I read a previous thread about what to take on a trip to China, but he was taking more equipment than I plan to. I would like to travel a bit lighter.

I'm headed to Yellowstone for 2 weeks in August and to Jordan (Amman, Petra, Dead Sea) for 2 weeks in October.
I will take my 50D on both trips.

I am leaning toward purchasing a new lens: the Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM. I've read some good reviews on this lens. And, it seems like a good overall lens for travel, so I don't have to take multiple or expensive lenses.

Am I way off on this thinking? Do any of y'all have this lens? Is there a different lens you'd suggest?

Also, I am thinking of purchasing a polarizer filter, as well. Do I really need to spend a huge amount on a polarizer? Are there any affordable, yet, good ones out there that don't cost an arm and a leg?


Thanks for any and all input!
E.

[Hein0100]

I had this lens. I had it for Christmas for abotu a day. My dad offered me the option of having the 70-200 f4L instead, which I ended up doing. The Sigma seemed to be a really nice lens. IT was compact and it seemed sharp enough for non professional use. I didn't like the aperture though. But in a big zoom like that it is one of the things you have to give up. I would try to take 2 lenses if you could. I know you are wanting to travel light but I would personally throw in a 50 1.8 or something else that will do low light much better. In china, depending on the area. I know I would love to capture photos of the night life and a big, moderately slow zoom like that will severely limit your options. Plus, on my 50D the 50mm is so small it is not a problem to carry around. With the Higher ISO of the 50D sensor you can capture alot with a nice fast prime.

Just my thoughts.
-Matt.

[johnastovall]

Affordable + Good Polarizer= Null Set

[venchka]

Hoya filters are as good or better than the lenses you will use them on.

[L Stegall]

As for the polarizer, think of it this way....you spend the money to get good glass and then slap a cheap filter in front of that good glass? You'll have a good polarizing filter for years and years and years, so get a good one.

I can't comment on the Sigma lens. But, if I had to travel with just one lens, it would be the Canon 24-105 f/4 L. I don't think you can go wrong with it. I have no idea how it compares to the Sigma price-wise, but again, get this and you'll have a high quality lens that will serve you for a long time.

[venchka]

Originally Posted by L Stegall

As for the polarizer, think of it this way....you spend the money to get good glass and then slap a cheap filter in front of that good glass? You'll have a good polarizing filter for years and years and years, so get a good one.

I can't comment on the Sigma lens. But, if I had to travel with just one lens, it would be the Canon 24-105 f/4 L. I don't think you can go wrong with it. I have no idea how it compares to the Sigma price-wise, but again, get this and you'll have a high quality lens that will serve you for a long time.

Lisa is correct. Assuming you can live with the 38mm FOV of the 24-105 on your 50D. Small sensors steal angle of view.

Hoya multi-coated filters aren't cheap the last time I looked. They will be fine.

[Carl Stone]

Originally Posted by esdramaqueen

I read a previous thread about what to take on a trip to China, but he was taking more equipment than I plan to. I would like to travel a bit lighter.

I'm headed to Yellowstone for 2 weeks in August and to Jordan (Amman, Petra, Dead Sea) for 2 weeks in October.
I will take my 50D on both trips.

I am leaning toward purchasing a new lens: the Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM. I've read some good reviews on this lens. And, it seems like a good overall lens for travel, so I don't have to take multiple or expensive lenses.

Am I way off on this thinking? Do any of y'all have this lens? Is there a different lens you'd suggest?

Also, I am thinking of purchasing a polarizer filter, as well. Do I really need to spend a huge amount on a polarizer? Are there any affordable, yet, good ones out there that don't cost an arm and a leg?


Thanks for any and all input!
E.

From the since you asked Dept.

How much sense does it make to buy a camera designed to use interchangeable lenses, then restrict it's ability by reducing the lens count to one? Do you think really think that one lens is going to serve every need? If so, why not just use a P&S camera?

Those are rhetorical questions, meant to stir your thoughts about what you're doing. If I wanted to reduce my lens count to one, it would be a fast 50mm. Yes, I would have top zoom with my feet, but I would not suffer poor IQ, and I would not be as restricted by ambient lighting. The Canon users here can recommend better choices for your needs than I can. If it was me, I'd be packing multiple lenses.

Rent the lens that you are considering, and if a slow 14X lens makes you happy, then disregard this post.

[L Stegall]

Carl, I second the idea of a fast 50 mm in any bag, any time. It's so small and light (assuming you aren't springing for the 50 mm f/1.2 L), it hardly counts as lugging around another lens. I've made several trips where I will purposely only took my 50 and it can be really fun to be looking for the small, more intimate details of a place that you can get with it.

That said, you are going to some really special places....and places that you may not return to for a long time, if ever. Are you going to kick yourself if you miss the little details or the big picture because you don't have the right gear? I've lugged 4-5 lenses a lot of places, but I also stick a much smaller, walking-around bag in my luggage, so that I can pare down what I'm carrying as appropriate.

I'm not sure which Canon body you have, but when I travel, I tend to look at my gear as needing to cover wide angle (a 17-40 f/4 or 16-35 f/2.8 are my preferences), tele (70-200 f/4 or f/2.8 are good options or, I love my 200 mm f/2.8 prime), macro (100 mm f/2.8 macro) and then my 50 (f/1.4) because there are plenty of times you just need a small, light, fast lens to grab and go.

And, I really would consider renting something for a trip like this if you can't afford to buy it.

[Carl Stone]

Nearly forgot, the polarizer. It make no sense to put a cheap filter in front of an expensive lens. In fact, some of use think that filters in general are way over used, but that's another topic. You get what you pay for when it comes to a polarizer, just like anything else. If you cheap out, your results will show it, forever, or at least over the life of the filter.

If you put a CP in front of that SLOW Sigma lens, you might as well paint the front lens element black! Once that lens gets into it's slowest aperture territory, reducing it further by at least a couple of stops, if not more, with a polarizer, will make focusing EXTREMELY difficult in all but the very best light. That means manual AND auto focusing, and in fact it may very well prevent auto focus in some light, depending on the particular camera body that the lens is mounted to.

You are proposing to shoot yourself in the foot, if you put a polarizer on slow 14X lens, and hope to use that lens exclusively.

[Carl Stone]

Originally Posted by L Stegall

Carl, I second the idea of a fast 50 mm in any bag, any time. It's so small and light (assuming you aren't springing for the 50 mm f/1.2 L), it hardly counts as lugging around another lens. I've made several trips where I will purposely only took my 50 and it can be really fun to be looking for the small, more intimate details of a place that you can get with it.

That said, you are going to some really special places....and places that you may not return to for a long time, if ever. Are you going to kick yourself if you miss the little details or the big picture because you don't have the right gear? I've lugged 4-5 lenses a lot of places, but I also stick a much smaller, walking-around bag in my luggage, so that I can pare down what I'm carrying as appropriate.

I'm not sure which Canon body you have, but when I travel, I tend to look at my gear as needing to cover wide angle (a 17-40 f/4 or 16-35 f/2.8 are my preferences), tele (70-200 f/4 or f/2.8 are good options or, I love my 200 mm f/2.8 prime), macro (100 mm f/2.8 macro) and then my 50 (f/1.4) because there are plenty of times you just need a small, light, fast lens to grab and go.

And, I really would consider renting something for a trip like this if you can't afford to buy it.

In spite of experience that shows overloading one's self with gear makes things cumbersome, I still do it! Yep, I'd be packing whatever I could carry on a trip that I may well never repeat.

That's a good range of focal lenths, Lisa, IMO. Unless one has bearers, of course. It would serve me for probably 90% of my needs. Keep in mind that the remaining 10% includes focal lengths that I will never use.

[Tom]

Man, there is no way I would take a crappy superzoom on great trips like that. You might as well use a point and shoot. I don't think you will get a quality difference from a point and shoot or a lens like that. A trip like that is probably a once in a lifetime deal, and I would take the best glass I could.

It is hard to beat a 24-105L for a travel lens. I'm going to Hawaii, and think I am only taking a 24-105L, 70-200L and a 1.4x/2.0x.

[L Stegall]

Originally Posted by Carl Stone

In spite of experience that shows overloading one's self with gear makes things cumbersome, I still do it! Yep, I'd be packing whatever I could carry on a trip that I may well never repeat.

That's a good range of focal lenths, Lisa, IMO. Unless one has bearers, of course. It would serve me for probably 90% of my needs. Keep in mind that the remaining 10% includes focal lengths that I will never use.

Yup, it's the lack of a bearer that keeps me from bringing more. I'd love to stick another prime or two in there. And did I mention I also like to stick in the converted IR body? And a flash. And the tripod, but that's in the checked luggage. Thank God for wheeled camera bags. It's a wonder my husband will travel with me sometimes. He will not, however, serve as bag toter. He's happy as a lark with his G9 and one (yes, just one) 4G SD card and does not understand my need for "stuff" as he calls it.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by venchka

Hoya filters are as good or better than the lenses you will use them on.

Really? Better than Leica 180/3.8 APO Telyt-R?

Maybe for the OP not for all.

[KenJulio]

You must have read my what to take to china thread. Well, I have to say, I used every lens I brought, the least used for ME was the 24-70. The 16-35 was on 85% of the time, the 70-200 got more use towards the end of the trip, and the 50 1.4 was used for any stitching or lower light situations.

Now, I didnt carry all my lenses everywhere, I had all my gear packed for check-in in the Think Tank Streetwalker HD, once we settled into the hotel and determined the sites for the day, I would carry the domke J2 or the Think Tank.

I could not do a wide-super tele zoom for a trip like this. As someone mention, these places you may not visit again, so why not bring logically the best lenses you could carry.

For the rest of our group, they all shot with a Nikon D700 and they had the 24-70 on 95% of the time and the 70-200 for the remainder. With the 16-35, I used my feet to zoom yet it changed the angle of some shots based on elevation. If I could redo it over again, no change in the gear setup.

[L Stegall]

Ken, I find my 24-70 is the lens I am least likely to pack for travel like this. For city walking, I much prefer the 16-35. As you said, I find it on my camera the vast majority of the time.