What Is A Walk Around Lens? (Page 5): How do you figure that? While 18 on an APS-C is close to a 24 on a FF, the other end, 135, is close to over 200 (all equiv) on a FF. VERY...

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

rgrenaderphoto wrote:

...For APSC system like a Fuji, the 18-135 which is the equivalent to a Fx 24-70 is great.

How do you figure that? While 18 on an APS-C is close to a 24 on a FF, the other end, 135, is close to over 200 (all equiv) on a FF. VERY different!

cahale Loc: San Angelo, TX

Mac wrote:

I have always thought of a walk around lens as a compact, light weight, general purpose lens to carry on strolls and take on picnics, etc. Something like 24-85mm or 28-105mm.

Lately I’ve seen recommendations like 18-400mm or 28-300mm which strikes me as overkill for a walk. They seem to me more like one size fits all lenses.

Is there a consensus on what makes a good walk around lens?

A lens with 2 legs?

trapper1 Loc: Southside Virginia

Nikon lists the current 28-300 lens at 800g or 28.2 oz. or 1.76 lb. Are you referring to an earlier version?

trapper1

stan0301 Loc: Colorado

I sure use the 16 - 300 - not much it can't do

revhen Loc: By the beautiful Hudson

I see a "walk around lens" as one that will reasonably cover near to far objects to photograph as you are taking a walk, not setting up for one specific shot. I use the Canon 18-135mm lens on my Canon 80D (1.6 cropped sensor) for this purpose. I have quite a collection of lenses ranging from 10-18mm to 150-600 to be used as planned and needed. Sounds like Amadeus is very similar to me!

Amadeus Loc: New York

I have an 18-135 on my Canon 80D. My other lenses are 50mm, 85mm, and 70-300. So I guess my walk around is the 18-135. Being a crop sensor, it's more like 28-215. The 18-135 is on my camera 95% of the time. With the lenses I own I'm pretty much stuck with that.

jeffhacker Loc: Dallas, Texas

ClarkJohnson wrote:

I have no single lens that does it all. I generally look for a lens that will (almost) eliminate the need to change lenses in the field. This could be an 18-140 for a family birthday party to a Z 24-200 for a tourist trip. My DX bodies would most likely stroll with me due to weight, but that depends on the circumstances.

The closest I come, I guess, is the camera I keep in the car “just in case.” It is a Z 50 with a lightweight Sigma 18-200 on an FTZ adapter.

Pretty much the same - I have a Z6 with the 24-200 zoom, but will sometimes carry the f/4 14-30mm or the f/1.8 85 mm, depending on where, what, when, etc. But I also still have the f/4 24-70 kit lens which is pretty decent as well.

M1911 Loc: DFW Metromess

To me, a walk around lens is one that will cover most situations one might run into in a touristy situation, just walking around in London, Paris, Podunk, their museums and other attractions. It should be comfortable to use and to carry. YMMV

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

amfoto1 wrote:

I agree with your definitions... br br To me a wa... (show quote)

LarryFB Loc: Depends where our RV is parked

smussler wrote:

I doubt it. Haven't seen a consensus on here about anything. A good walk around lens I imagine differs depending on where you like to walk and what you like to photograph, and probably the camera - Full Frame, Cropped Sensor or other sizes. If one has a lens that stays on their camera 85% of the time, I'd say one would think that a good walk around lens. For me it's my 18-140mm.

I agree. I typically have an 18-140mm lens on my camera. However, if I'm specifically looking for birds it will be a longer lens, if I'm after interior shots it will probably me my 10-20mm. Having said that my 18-140mm is probably on my camera 90% of the time.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

LarryFB wrote:

I agree. I typically have an 18-140mm lens on my camera. However, if I'm specifically looking for birds it will be a longer lens, if I'm after interior shots it will probably me my 10-20mm. Having said that my 18-140mm is probably on my camera 90% of the time.

johnny1950 Loc: Palm Coast, Florida

I was looking for a small camera and lens to put in my pocket on the motorcycle. Even with a pancake lens the A6400 was to big. I picked up a Panasonic ZS100 with a Leica 25 to 250 lens. Total price was around $350.00. The pictures are great and it has a lot of features. F stop is limited but has all the shooting modes. Just a suggestion
Johnny

hrblaine

[quote=smussler] If one has a lens that stays on their camera 85% of the time, I'd say one would think that a good walk around lens.

Well, sitting in my camera bag is my Canon 5Dc with a 35mm lens on it. About the only time it comes off, my 70-300 gets put on. I have a drawer full of lens that I seldom if ever use, bought when I was younger and dumber. Several bodies too, even a (gasp) Nikon. <g> Harry PS Started wih a Voightlander 35mm, moved up to an F. When I went digital I switched to a Canon (the reasons are lost in the mists of time), still there.

Riverrune

I have a Nikion Z 24-200 lens for my Z6 that I use as a general "walk around" lens. Thats for when I'm out walking the dog or on someother ramble that doesn't have any planned photo objective. Its just there as I walk around, in case something interesting comes up. I have other lenses, mainly for my D850 that tend to get more of a focused attention.

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

Mac wrote:

I have always thought of a walk around lens as a compact, light weight, general purpose lens to carry on strolls and take on picnics, etc. Something like 24-85mm or 28-105mm.

Lately I’ve seen recommendations like 18-400mm or 28-300mm which strikes me as overkill for a walk. They seem to me more like one size fits all lenses.

Is there a consensus on what makes a good walk around lens?

Depends on what you are walking around for. Could be buildings, autos, people etc.