lens suggestion...

[ericamcl]

can anyone suggest a good "all around" lens? I'm looking for something that will do well in low light conditions as well as bright sunny conditions...does such a thing even exist? I'm plotting and planning my next lens purchase around our trip in March and don't want to have to take any more equipment to the parks than i have to..

 

[gokenin]

I just recently bought the tamron 28-75 as my walk around lens since I came to the conclusion that I rarely shot anything wider than 28mm but I am sure that you will get many other suggestions but the best thing i can suggest is that you try to figure out the range you shot in the most and but the lens that best fits that range. course there is always the megazooms but you will not get good low light ability out of them from what i hear

 

[Groucho]

It would also help if you'd tell us what camera you're using.

If you want one lens that goes really wide, can zoom really far, takes pin-sharp photos, and works well in low light - that lens does not exist.

 

[Anewman]

I just recently bought the tamron 28-75 as my walk around lens

I too have that tamron(canon mount), and feel it is a great lens at a great price.

 

[Groucho]

Ditto on the Tamron, it's probably the best of the bunch in terms of short-range fast zooms (outside of perhaps some OEM much-more-expensive ones.) For long zooms, Sigma's 70-200mm F2.8 is highly regarded, and apparently they're releasing an updated one soon.

For real low-light, it's best to start with a 50mm prime, F1.4 or F1.8, and go from there.

Most any lens that's good in low light should be good in bright light, it's the other way around that's tricky.

 

[Master Mason]

Not knowing what camera you have makes it a little harder, but I would toss out the sigma/canon 24-70 f/2.8 if your looking for a canon mount. The canon is one of the best zoom lenses canon makes IMO. The sigma has good reviews, it isn't the canon, but it is also half the price.

 

[ericamcl]

thanks for all of the replies.
i've got a canon digital rebel xti....i want something that will do well in low light, not really interested in a SUPER zoom though.

am i being too vague?

 

[boBQuincy]

It's hard to beat Canon's 24-70 f/2.8 if you have the $$$.
A different approach, the 24-105 f/4 offers IS which makes it even better for low light than the f/2.8 as long as you don't photograph moving subjects.

Not as good for low light (but still not bad) and a lot less $$$ is Canon's 24-85. It is f/3.5 at the short end but f/4.5 at the long end so it is really only a low light lens at the short end (like most others).

 

[Forevryoung]

I'm looking for the same answer for a Pentax K110 (which I absolutely love)

I have the kit lens and a sigma telephoto (thanks mom and dad for buying a 35mm Pentax a million years ago and buying nice lenses!)

I'm looking for a good (used) lens for my trip to avoid carrying around the massive telephoto (because I'll never switch them in time for the shot I want, I'm slow)

Would I be best off just sticking with the kit lens?

 

[Oogie-Boogie]

The new Canon 17-55 f2.8is is pricey as all get out, but is abosultely top of class for quality, and will handle low light better than the 50mm f1.8 IMO. I've tried handholding interior shots with the nifty fifty and the 17-55is beats it hands down, the stabilization is just that good.

I couldn't afford the lens though, so I rented it this month for our trip to WDW. Will post pics on return in middish december.

I also own the 28-135is and have to say, it's pretty difficult to use for interior low light shots. It's a great affordable outdoor walkaround lens though.

Definately pick up the 50mm f1.8 if you haven't already. It's dirt cheap, tack sharp, and just a great lens to play with, especially for portraits.

Another one you may want to look at is the 30mm f1.4 Sigma. I find the 50mm with the crop to be too far a zoom for most interior work.

There's a lot of lens of varying quality and prices to choose from for that kind of shooting though. The forums at dpreview.com have a section dedicated just to canon slr lenses, that has tons of user reviews and comparisons.

Best of luck!

 

[Groucho]

I'm looking for the same answer for a Pentax K110 (which I absolutely love)

I have the kit lens and a sigma telephoto (thanks mom and dad for buying a 35mm Pentax a million years ago and buying nice lenses!)

I'm looking for a good (used) lens for my trip to avoid carrying around the massive telephoto (because I'll never switch them in time for the shot I want, I'm slow)

Would I be best off just sticking with the kit lens?

I'd still recommend the Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 - it's a bit bigger and heavier than the kit lens but better in low light, and heck, better all-around (though the kit lens is not too shabby itself.) I use mine as my main everyday lens.

 

[Oogie-Boogie]

Tamron's got some great lenses. Their 17-50mm f2.8 is also a very nice lens. However they do have some issues with consistancy of quality, and many people have reported new lenses off-focusing front or back, and have had to go a few rounds with Tamron's tech to get it resolved. They don't charge, other than shipping, though, so even if they don't get it right the first time eventually they will. It's just something to add to the consideration.

However, the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 is one of the lightest and smallest mid range zooms around, and the image quality of a good copy is very good. It's a stellar walk around lens for light duty use, I wouldn't recommend it for someone who needs a rugged lens that could take a few knocks, but for general use, I'd agree, it's a fantastic deal.

 

[Anewman]

Tamron's got some great lenses. Their 17-50mm f2.8 is also a very nice lens. However they do have some issues with consistancy of quality, and many people have reported new lenses off-focusing front or back, and have had to go a few rounds with Tamron's tech to get it resolved. They don't charge, other than shipping, though, so even if they don't get it right the first time eventually they will. It's just something to add to the consideration.

However, the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 is one of the lightest and smallest mid range zooms around, and the image quality of a good copy is very good. It's a stellar walk around lens for light duty use, I wouldn't recommend it for someone who needs a rugged lens that could take a few knocks, but for general use, I'd agree, it's a fantastic deal.

The same consistency issue has been reported about every single lens maker, I have not noticed it to be any more wide spread with Tamron. I have even heard consistency "reports" about some expensive white lenses.

Yes it is lighter/smaller than Tokina/Sigma/Canon lenses in the same focal range and aperture. Which for those doing some heavy duty walking it might be of benefit.