Need lens advice - Canon dSLR

[Lux Interior]

I am going to buy a Canon T1i and I would like to get a good, all-purpose zoom lens for the budget-minded non-pro.

The Sigma 18-200 has been recommended in the past. Still a good choice?

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/det...oding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance

This Tamron is cheaper, but doesn't have optical stabilization like the Sigma. How important is the OS?

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/det...oding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance

[mjgkramer]

When shooting at 200mm it's nice to have.

[Wagman849]

What about this one? I don't own it, but have been considering it:

www.amazon.com

-Wags

[jardster]

The Tamron can be found cheaper.... http://www.buydig.com/shop/product.aspx?...200XRDIEOS

I have it and love it.

[Lux Interior]

Wagman849 wrote:
What about this one? I don't own it, but have been considering it:

I'm more interested in having a "shorter" wide-angle than a longer telephoto.

[zero]

I am also interested in a "all in one" lens, that is mostly wide-angle for a new Tli. Don't really care about zoom

[deckeda]

A good walkaround lens that's more versatile would be something like the Tamron AF28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/2875mm.asp It's got the range most shots would require, speed and sharpness. An 18-200 has the ability to take (by comparison) more lackluster shots over a broader range.

I'm terminally broke, so my only lens right now is a Canon's wonderful "nifty fifty" 50mm II. I "zoom" with my feet or by mildly cropping later on the computer. And because the thing goes down to ƒ1.8, I never use flash unless my subject is right in front of me and the room has essentially no light. Adjust ISO speed up a little and I'm good.

Want to have the subject in focus and blur the background? I can do it easily by adjusting shutter speed/aperture. With a slow lens, you get to do it in Photoshop later if you can.

With any of those 18-200s you're looking at, when indoors you'll be bumping up against how slow they are, turning on the flash, getting those fake-bright subjects with too-dark backgrounds instead of using natural light.

A 18-200mm lens is exceedingly limiting. You want it because it covers "all the bases" except performance, an SLR's greatest strength over point-and-shoot. You don't need pro lenses either.

http://www.shutterbug.com/features/0899sb_rediscover/

http://www.vothphoto.com/spotlight/artic...n-lens.htm

[sam ward]

i second deckeda

[Racer X]

There was a time people learned to "pan" a lens, and hold it really still.

the wider the zoom range, the more shortcuts they have to make.

[wowzer]

I shoot Nikon so take my words with some salt...also I'm no pro...so take a double dose...

The Tamron 28-75 is my go to lens for portraits and a walk around. While it's long for a DX sensor, it's great...sharp at f2.8 (especially with in-camera AF fine tuning). Great for portraits at 75mm and great for panoramas at 28mm. If you saw my Beth Page pano's, I used my tamron (I believe).

I have recently gone to bringing my Nikon 18-55 VR with Sigma 50-500, which gives me 18 - 500mm!


Back to your question about the Sigma 18-200 OS. I've used one and I own the 18-200 DC. I think the OS will add about a stop (may 2) of light, but the nice thing is to have the ability to use slow shutter speeds with flash, that adds to creativity. Overall, it should be a nice performer...good at 18mm and 200mm, but less good at 100mm (IIRC).

GL.