If you had to choose a lens

[Twoboysnmygirl]

to walk around with at WDW, which would you choose?
Nikon 35mm
or
Nikon 18-200mm

???

I know, strange choices. I have a D40 with a kit lens (18-55 which I dislike) and 55-200mm VR that I love, BUT, I have a hard time getting closer shots and I know this won't work on rides, etc...I tried it at the zoo and was backing up into people constantly trying to get the whole family in the picture!

I can only afford to rent one lens and would prefer not to have to change lenses all day, I want great shots, but this is first and foremost a family trip, not a trip to take perfect pics.

Which would you rent and why??

Another silly question as I haven't ever used it...do I have to get up in people's faces with a 35mm? I've never used a lens that I cannot "zoom in" with! I know I sound like a noob...I pretty much am, only had my camera since spring.

 

[YesDear]

If you can only take one, take the 18-200. Understanding you will not get ride shots, the 18-200 will give you the flexibility you are looking for.

 

[Evad]

Take both and switch lens's only when you go on dark rides. There should be time to do this while waiting in ride lines. This is what I plan to do with my 50mm. My 18-70mm will be my walk around lens and the 70-300mm is there in case I need the reach.

 

[alan]

I would go for the 18-200mm, and try to keep it stopped down a little.

Caveat: I don't have that lens, and am going on my experience with the Sigma 18-200mm lens for Canon. If I kept it at, say f/8.0 whenever possible I got pretty reasonable results.

regards,
/alan

 

[Suburbanmom]

If you are mainly going for family snapshots, take the 18-200 and have a wonderful time.

 

[KarenAylwood]

The 18-200mm hands down. I have the Canon 18-200mm and it's great as a walkaround lens.

Last year I took my 18-55mm kit lens because I had just bought my camera a few weeks earlier and it was really great except for a few times when I wished I had a longer lens (mostly at AK, and the show in front of the castle at MK). I spent most of my time at the wider angles.

This year I'm bringing my 18-200mm and my 30mm f/1.4 but that's just for night photography without a tripod, and for dark rides. Walking around I'll be using my 18-200!

 

[Groucho]

I'd go with the 35mm, myself - you will probably miss a few shots from it being not wide enough, but you will probably get more "special" photos due to the low DoF and superior image quality.

You may also want to practice your lens-changing. You should be able to change lenses very quickly - grab the second lens from wherever you store it, place it next to the lens mounted, and in as quick a motion as you can, remove the old lens and mount the lens one. This part can usually be done in a second or two; ideally you leave the lens mount on the camera exposed only for half a second or so. Put the other lens away, and you're done. It should not be a big deal, and will pay great dividends in the photos you'll get - IMHO it is a bit of a shame to use a DSLR with a PnS-style ultrazoom lens on the front.

 

[webshark3]

I'd go with the 35mm, myself - you will probably miss a few shots from it being not wide enough, but you will probably get more "special" photos due to the low DoF and superior image quality.

I've settled into the 24mm f2.8 prime myself (~38.4mm equal), but keep the kit lens tucked into a diaper bag for 18mm wide angle only.

 

[kaffinito]

If you can only take one my first choice would be the 18-200 hands down. It really served me well at EPCOT and AK. If you can take both, the 35mm won't take up a lot of room and can easily be carried in a small purse.

The 35mm takes really great shots, and to get the shots you walk back and forth until you have the subject matter just where you want it. It's not tough once you try it a few times.