Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main Photography Discussion
Walk around lens
Page <<first <prev 6 of 9 next> last>>
May 12, 2012 15:30:38   #
AVarley Loc: Central Valley, California
 
I usually keep the 28-135mm f/3.5 on my 7D, but my 50mm f/1.4 is always close-by :) You just never know what's gonna jump out and catch your attention, so best be prepared for as much as possible right?

Reply
May 12, 2012 15:45:27   #
Carlmk Loc: Naples, FL & Boston, MA
 
I use a Nikon 18-200mm lens on my D7000 and it meets all my needs. Have taken over 500 photos in one week of London. You cannot always get close enough to use a fixed lens or short lens. Nothing like an all in one. I have given my daughter a Tamron 18-270zoom. It seemes very good and as good as the Nikon.

Reply
May 12, 2012 15:45:32   #
Carlmk Loc: Naples, FL & Boston, MA
 
I use a Nikon 18-200mm lens on my D7000 and it meets all my needs. Have taken over 500 photos in one week of London. You cannot always get close enough to use a fixed lens or short lens. Nothing like an all in one. I have given my daughter a Tamron 18-270zoom. It seemes very good and as good as the Nikon.

Reply
 
 
May 12, 2012 15:53:36   #
Photogdog Loc: New Kensington, PA
 
Pellwanger wrote:
I know this question has been asked before but lately I have been thinking about getting one so I would not have to lug all my equipment around. So here it is. "What walk around lens do you prefer and Why?" Thanks in advance for your answers.


PW,

If I'm out with the 5D MK II, I put the 24-70 f2.8 on it. If I want to go lighweight, I take an NEX-7 with a 24mm f1.8 on it and toss a 50mm f1.8 in a side pocket. The NEX has an HVL-F20AM flash always attached to use as fill if need be. It folds down when not in use, taking up very little space.

PD

Reply
May 12, 2012 15:58:13   #
Hal81 Loc: Bucks County, Pa.
 
Larry L wrote:
OK, I'll jump in where i otherwise should fear to tread - and believe me, I'm no angel. Be that as it may, my favorite walk around is my Rollei 35 with it's virtually infallible Zeiss 40mm f3.5. It is a viewfinder - not rangefinder. I estimate the distance and twist the lens to what I believe is the correct distance. Shutter speeds are from 1 sec to 1/500. My wife bought it for me for Christmas 1972 and it has literally been twice around the globe shooting B&W and Fulvia. Oh yes, it is a film camera and it is beautiful in it's simplicity.

Having graduated within the past month to a Nikon D5100, my Canon G-9 is now relegated to my walk around digital. I'm told that it's sensor is sharp enough to produce a great quality 11x14 print but I haven't printed anything the Canon has been used for since i got it brand new about 5-or-so years ago. But it does have an optical viewfinder so, as far as I can see, I have both film and digital "walking" camerras covered.
OK, I'll jump in where i otherwise should fear to ... (show quote)


Was that a 1/2 frame camera? I always wanted one of those.

Reply
May 12, 2012 16:48:29   #
larryzplace Loc: Elk Grove Village Illinois
 
Nikon D90 With my Nikon 18-105 Covers most situations, this lens stays on the camera the most.
I will take my Nikon 70-300 tomorrow to use at the Zoo
My Tamron 60mm Macro when i go to the Botanic Gardens...

Reply
May 12, 2012 17:31:00   #
doccharlie Loc: Chicago
 
I don't walk very well, so moving in and out a lot is problematic for me. I keep a Nikon 18-200 on my Nikon D7000. I also carry in my bag, a Tamron 2.8 90 mm for the occasional flower I may want to get in close on.

Reply
 
 
May 12, 2012 17:42:37   #
Roger Hicks Loc: Aquitaine
 
Double post screw-up. Sorry.

Reply
May 12, 2012 17:43:00   #
Roger Hicks Loc: Aquitaine
 
FOTOSTAN wrote:
HUH... now I've read everything.... "a walk around lens".. OMG what has photography come DOWN to ????


Eh? What's the problem with a 'walk around lens'? It's the lens you have on your camera when you're walking around. What's wrong with that?

Cheers,

R.

Reply
May 12, 2012 17:44:33   #
Cameralark Loc: Torrington, CT
 
I use an 18-200 Nikkor and I love it. It is perfect for almost everything.

Reply
May 12, 2012 17:45:46   #
Roger Hicks Loc: Aquitaine
 
GC likes NIKON wrote:
Ughhh !! This is like the "one gun African Safari" question !!! Everyone is different, shoots different images and is usually over-gunned.

OK, my 2 cents .... All you guys who advocate 18-200 and 18-300 should go back and look at you exif data for a day when you truely went out and "walked around".

YES!

Cheers,

R.

Reply
 
 
May 12, 2012 17:52:30   #
roulitick Loc: Texas
 
I agree with the 18-200...Gives some versatility. I usually use a D7000 and use a handstrap. The handstrap helps offset/balance the extra weight..

Reply
May 12, 2012 18:26:27   #
nikonesian Loc: Midwest USA
 
I'm with PrarieSeasons. The 18-200 is an excellent "take everywhere I go" lens.

PrairieSeasons wrote:
Some of these responses are different than others because people have different internal images of what a "walk around lens" means -- perhaps even what "walking around" means.

I interpret the need for a walk around lens to occur when one has little or no idea of what photographic opportunities will happen that day. It might be people and close, it might be landscape or urbanscape and distant, or anything in between.

My walk-around lens is an 18-200mm lens on a D300s for that very reason - I don't know what pictures will be there. If I'm truly walking around with one camera, that will be it. If I have a specific objective, I will usually have a prime lens on a D90 for that objective and the 18-200 on a D300s "just in case".
Some of these responses are different than others ... (show quote)

Reply
May 12, 2012 18:42:19   #
nikonesian Loc: Midwest USA
 
I take my 18-200 to work, to the park, to pick up the kids practically everywhere. I use the full range. That's why I bought it. Does that mean I won't use other lenses? Of course I will. Does it mean that I think the 18-200 is optically superior to all other lenses. Of course not.

At this time most of my photography revolves around kid's events/sports and photos of opportunity. The 18-200 fits the bill right now.

GC likes NIKON wrote:
Ughhh !! This is like the "one gun African Safari" question !!! Everyone is different, shoots different images and is usually over-gunned.

OK, my 2 cents .... All you guys who advocate 18-200 and 18-300 should go back and look at you exif data for a day when you truely went out and "walked around". Not a day when you had specific images in mind to shoot. Just a day when you threw a camera in your bag and went for a walk downtown, or to the park. I'll bet you never got past 120mm !!!

NOW for me: I usually wind up going to my 18-70 and if I will be somewhere in wide open spaces, I will put my light weight 55-200 VR in my pocket (and it usually stays there in my pocket !!)

I have thought about getting a 18-105/120/135 but I seldom get out there to the long end. AND Ken Rockwell says my 18-70 is sharper. I think that I have it covered with 18-70 & 55-200 VR.

I have a 10-20 Sigma and only use it when up close or around a lot of people. Not enough to pack it around. Perhaps a 400 for birds of prey is in the cards later on.
Ughhh !! This is like the "one gun African Sa... (show quote)

Reply
May 12, 2012 19:10:56   #
colo43 Loc: Eastern Plains of Colorado
 
My favorite walk around is my 70-300.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 6 of 9 next> last>>
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
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.