Lense advice

[CSHaydt]

I am new to the photography board. I usually hang in the camping and family boards but i have a question for any of you who are willing to despense some advice.

i have a new Canon T2i - i love it, it's a great digital camera. I take a ton of photo's of my kids, vacations, sports all that great stuff....

anyway... We are having our first family trip to Disney in a month and i want to get a lense that will give me a variety of shots (yes i know i will lose something by going with a lense like this but it's better then carrying 2 lenses with me)

I am looking at an 18-200 lense - (Sigma or Tamron) mostly because of the cost.
Question 1. - does anyone recommend one over the other
Question 2. - I am aware that neither of them are image stabilized - is this a huge issue - or is it just 100 times better to go to the canon lense that is image stabilized for $300 more then the other two lenses?

any help would be greatly appreciated!

 

[mom2rtk]

Well, keep in mind that it IS cheaper to get the right one to start with, so do your research and spend the extra money if you can.

The ultra zoom lenses are certainly convenient. But as you zoom to those long lengths, the largest aperture available to you gets smaller and smaller, requiring longer shutter times, making your shots prone to blurring. To be honest, I always had trouble at long zoom lengths with my ultra zoom. I upgraded to the IS last fall. It does help some, especially since I have unsteady hands.

On a bright sunny day you can certainly get by without IS, but on a cloudy day, if you want to zoom without it, you'll definitely have trouble.

 

[ChiSoxKeith]

Man I should get paid by these places.....

But if you can't go to a local camera shop to try either of those two lenses on your camera, give www.borrowlenses.com or www.lensrentals.com a shot.

I have used www.borrowlenses.com on two occassions and I love their service.I rented a 400mm f/2.8 IS zoom lens last fall to shoot my stepson's HS football games. LOVED IT, but I could never afford that expensive of a lens.

www.lensrentals.com has been featured on a couple of photography podcasts I listen to so I'm going to try them out for my December trip to WDW.

Before you decide to drop a ton of money on glass, rent the glass you are thinking of buying. Sure you have to spend some money on the rental, but you can actually see what you can do with the lens.

To get the Canon 18-200 f/3.5 - 5.6 lens you mention for 10 days (I don't know how long your trip to disney is) is only $76.25 over at www.lensrentals.com.

With borrowlenses.com I simply reserve the lens I wanted, paid the fee and it showed up in a very nice traveling case and had a pre-paid return UPS sticker in the box.

Part of me really wants to buy the Canon 100-400 IS zoom lens, but the other part of me says I won't use it often enough to justify the $1600 price tag on it. I can rent the lens for my 6 day trip for only $111. I'm either going to do that (to shoot animals over at AKV - my first stay there) or get a fast 50mm lens and a fisheye for fun.

 

[AlbertZeroK]

We use the Tamron at work, it's Okay. We shoot pictures for mass appraisal, so quality is not an issue with any lens (we still shoot some jobs with 640x480 floppy disk based Sony Mavica Cameras.)

First, at the longer ends, you will notice image issues and the longer the focal point of the lens (mm's), then the more you need IS. I rarely buy a lens without IS. That being said, if you shoot normally in bright sun light and well lit areas, like another poster said, IS isn't that big of an issue.

I would choose Sigma over the Tamron, but that's because I have their 50mm f/1.4 and the Bigma and love both - although, I would prefer to have a 400mm and 500mm prime over the Bigma, the cost difference would pay for a nice disney trip.

Glass or your lenses are the most important investment you can make! Bodies are rarely the issue, heck, I'm looking to replace with my t2i with a 1d Mark II N which is a three generation old 8MP camera. It doesn't phase me because I have some great glass. In other words, spend all you can afford on glass! I'd try to get the Canon 18-200 IS.

Oh, I forgot to say, I borrowed the 18-200 IS from Canon (CPS Gold gets me free lens borrowing.) and it's Okay, I think much better than the Tamron, feels better built anyways. Focused faster too.

 

[zackiedawg]

The Tamron 18-200mm lens is generally accepted as 'ok' but not amazing...if looking at Tamron's lenses, you should probably consider the slightly more expensive but much much better 18-250mm. That lens was much better rated by every review site and most users agree - huge improvement across the board. No worries on Tamron vs Sigma - I own both, and they both can make cheaper and nicer lenses...the Tamron 18-250 is one of their better ones for sure. There's now also a Tamron 18-270mm available, that squeezes out more range - it seems to have reviewed pretty well, but the 18-250 seems to be regarded as their best.

The Canon 18-200 should be a reliable and solid enough choice. You should be able to get by without IS in good light, or since your camera is capable of shooting fairly clean at higher ISOs you can always raise the ISO a bit in lower light to make up for the slower lens. But IS will certainly make things easier...obviously if you're willing to pay the price for it! Sigma does make an 18-250mm lens that has stabilization, if you want to consider paying more money - something to throw in the mix along with the stabilized Canon version. It really just comes down to if you're willing to spend the extra money - if so, I'd recommend stabilized over unstabilized all the time for any lens over 150mm. But if budget considerations are important, I think you could get by fairly well without it.

 

[CSHaydt]

Thank you everyone - that was exactly what i was looking for!!! Great Advice... now i just have to make a decision!