crazydaddio Loc: Toronto Ontario Canada

Confession. Have also done "walkaround" with a double BR strap and 2 bodies, slinging a 24-70 and a 70-200. I look like a complete dork ...but I don't care :-)

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

Don't put it around your neck!
I have a 16-300 as a walkaround lens and a 150-600 when I'm walking around the San Diego Zoo, Safari Park, SeaWorld, Ramona Grasslands, or the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge. I carry it in my hand since the 150-600 has a really nice carrying handle on it. If I need to stop and catch my breath from all the hiking, I simple do some wrist, arm, and shoulder exercises....................

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

I disagree. The walk-about lenses is the lense on your camera that you walk-about with. - whatever that lenses might be. For me, I would use my 14-54 2.8/3.5 (28-108 in 35mm terms). I have use that lense by itself since 2008, until this year, as my only walk-about lense.

Harvey Loc: Pioneer, CA

There was a time that I carried my Canon sx40 in a fanny pack also. LOL I got images I wanted.
.

David in Dallas Loc: Dallas, Texas, USA

Before I "went digital" I carried 2 film cameras with me on my tours: a Nikon FE with a Vivitar 28mm f/1.8 loaded with ASA 800 film and a Nikon N70 with a Tamron 28-200mm loaded with ASA 400 film; both were slung around my neck--the FE hung high and the N70 low. My first DSLR was a Nikon D50 and I did purchase it with the 18-200mmVR zoom. That lens moved to the D7000 when I upgraded, and when I got the D7100 I also bought the newer 18-200VR2 for it. The D50 and older 18-200VR still function (D7000 died) and I use those as my emergency backups on trips.

Obviously, the 18-200VR2 is my "walk around" lens--I don't take any others along. I also don't carry a tripod, because the tours I'm on don't give enough time to set one up and a lot of the locations visited don't permit them, anyway. My setup is not perfect for every task, but it's good enough for them--I can be wide-angle for scenic shots, middle range for some needs, and I use the telephoto as a pseudo-macro for photographing flowers, etc. (as well as for long shots). When I'm on a guided tour I don't have time to be changing lenses--I don't always even have the time to properly line up a shot. The 18-200mm serves me well.

Mary Kate Loc: NYC

Or. Hard telling not knowing.

AZNikon Loc: Mesa, AZ

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

A walk around lens would have legs so that it could walk around by itself. LOL Yes, a walk around lens in my opinion would be any lens that you would use as a utility lens and have on your camera most of the time. But that would be different for most people. I have seen some lenses that have a great zoom focal length range that might make perfect utility lenses. I have been considering one myself. I know a woman that has her 18-200 on her Canon most of the time and she gets great images with this lens. I see that Tamron just came out with one that has a range of 18-400mm. Wow. I wonder how light it is and how sharp it is. I know that my friends 18-200 isn't the best lens on the market, but it is an EF lens so it works on all Canon cameras, and it's plastic so it's not the best build quality, but it is very light and a pleasure to walk around with. I have a 24-70mm f/2.8 L series lens that is wonderful glass, but it is quite heavy and doesn't have the zoom range that the 18-200mm lens has. I know quite a few Nikon users that have their 18-300mm lens and they are quite happy with that as their utility lens. To each his own I guess.

cambriaman Loc: Central CA Coast

I have two walk-around lenses. It depends on where I am "walking-around". My 24-120mm is my "in-town" WAL (walking around lens - just coined an acronym I have not seen before!). My country WAL is my 28-300mm lens. Works for me! Please don't write to point out the focal length overlap. The 24-120 is smaller and lighter than the 28-300.

graybeard

I do have TWO walkabout lenses, one a "heavy" one and one a "light" one. The heavy is my Tamron 28-300. It is my most general purpose lens, covering most of the range that I would use. However, because of its weight and bulk, I take it with me only when I am intending to shoot. When I do not plan to shoot, but do not want to walk around unarmed, I use my light lens, a Canon 35-80. It is plastic, very lightweight and small, but at least covers enough area for those times when I find myself in a situation that needs a picture.

thephotoman Loc: Rochester, NY

Delderby, a walk about lens is really a general term used to describe a lens not designed for a specific purpose. Such lenses could be macro, a long prime lens and many more. Depending on where the photographer is going to be walking, the lens might be different. And yes, there are many opinions on this subject, but they are all right for what the photog is shooting. I believe most hogs answer the question of which lens, by stating what they use and why. For a person starting street photography, this advice would be very helpful.

graybeard

Please excuse me if this un-discerning amateur considers your comment a bit snobbish and condescending.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

I wouldn't say that at all. It's more like the lens you take out most of the time you go out for general shooting.

spencerp

I have found that my 18-135 lens is a good walk-about lens for my Canon T3i. Wide enough for group shots, while the 135, although not a strong telephoto, has enough for my needs.

donb17