Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
What Lens
Page <<first <prev 4 of 4
Mar 28, 2018 00:03:18   #
therwol Loc: USA
 
Mac wrote:
Thanks for the info Therwol. I've only had it out for a few shots and I'm looking forward to giving it a workout soon.


It isn't so difficult to design a 3 to 1 zoom (35-105) with good optical quality. I gave the same lens to my son in law and should have kept it. It is sharper than my 28-105 AF D, which is also a pretty sharp lens. I kept the latter because it goes a bit wider and focuses much close, actually down to 1:2. (Not a true macro lens with true macro performance, but for a quick shot in the field of a flower, it will do.) The only other criticism of the lens is the limited range at the wide end.

People here are suggesting lenses with a much wider zoom range, and there is a lot to be said for that if you're going to carry one lens. Keep in mind that there are compromises when you're talking about lenses with an 8:1 zoom range, and it will show under close scrutiny, but that's the issue. If you are going to make pictures that are less than 16x20 viewed at a normal distance, it matters little. If you're comfortable with 35mm at the wide end, you should be happy with the lens. You can always pop a 20 or 24mm lens on the camera in a pinch.

Reply
Mar 28, 2018 00:09:32   #
rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania
 
SAVH wrote:
I use the Nikon 28-300 as my walk-around lens and have been very pleased with the results and flexibility. Ken Rockwell has an article at his site (kenrockwell.com) extolling the performance and convenience of the 28-300 mm zoom lens on the Nikon D-850 and other full sensor bodies. I expect Canon must have a similar lens.


I wish Canon did have a similar lens. I too have the Nikkor 28-300, and it is one of my favorite lenses. I also have the Canon 28-300 but it is not 'similar to the Nikkor. It's more than twice the size and weight and cost. Like the Nikkor, it is extremely versatile, but it's so darn heavy, and expensive.

Reply
Mar 28, 2018 08:08:33   #
rcorne001 Loc: Cary, NC
 
For a "walk around" lens, I will go to either a Tamron f2.8-4 17-70 or Sigma f1.8 50-100. I consider whether I will be taking shots indoors (probably the Sigma) or if mostly outdoors where I might want to go with a "wider" view (Tamron).

Now I did pick up a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 for situations in which I didn't want to carry my DSLR. For example - situations where I might have to set the camera down and take my eye off it for short periods, bicycle rides where I want the camera handy but not have all the weight of the camera hanging from my neck, and finally in situations where my wife and I would be together and she might want a shot. I can put the Panasonic in auto mode, hand the camera to her and let her snap away. That way she could enjoy taking images SHE wanted without being intimidated by my set up. It also freed me up from - "Will you take a picture of [fill in the blank].

All that being said though - if I am going out to shoot something specific which I want the advantages of the DSLR, I broke down and "justified" getting a second camera! LOL! There was not a situation I could come up with that wouldn't justify the second camera. Think GAS here! LOL!

Reply
Page <<first <prev 4 of 4
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.