camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

The term walk about seems to be confusing to you or perhaps you do not understand the meaning, at least as I understand it. A kit lens is not necessarily the only walk about lens, any lens that is used as a solo lens for the purpose of general photography also fits the term. I hear the term walk around also often referring to such multi-purpose lenses.
You are absolutely correct, the optics of kit lenses are surprisingly good but the plastic feel is the result of using materials that will make the cost cheaper. The majority of the lenses made today have that plastic feeling because we decided that the all metal lenses were very heavy for most users. I am a Nikon user and I find that the old metal lenses were not only well made but also there was something special in them when it came to optical quality. I still own a 1974 Nikon 80-200 f4.5 zoom that I had AI converted for use with my digital cameras. Of all the modern zooms I have NONE is better optically than the old lens in spite of their high technologies.
It weights a ton which refrains me from using it in my travels but locally and for short trips in my car it has seen lots of use yielding awesome images. It is not a walk about lens obviously.
There must be a reason why manufacturers keep on making these "walk about" lenses.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

In 1995 when I switched from Pentax to Canon, I was surprised at Canon's use of plastics, but before I moved back to Pentax twenty years later, I came to appreciate the performance and durability that Canon was getting from space-age plastics.

crazydaddio Loc: Toronto Ontario Canada

If you qualify "walk-about" lens as the one that seems to stick to your camera when out and about....70-200 F2.8 IS II.... I know, I am weird...Weights a ton but I just can't seem to sacrifice that dreamy bokeh, portrait-level feel and low-light capability that this lens creates. I have used it for street photography in Galway, Ireland and walks in the woods with wife and dog. It's a bit "obvious" for street photography but the 200mm reach allows for some discretion. I may look into a wide/long lens like the EF 28-300 f/3.5-5.6L IS USM as rmorrison1116 indicated ...wont solve the heft/discretion issue and may not be as good a low-light performer but will give me the wide end I lack in the 70-200mm. ...willing to sacrifice some sharpness...

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

My walkabout lens is my eye. Then I use whatever lens I have on my camera which is usually my 18-200.

ole sarg Loc: south florida

I would have to disagree! The lens on the camera you are carrying when walking around is your walk around lens!

insman1132 Loc: Southwest Florida

Just one vote for a high quality Bridge camera with a long reach as a backup camera. Then you don't worry, at least not as much, about whether or not you happen to have your best walk-about lens.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Smaller (kit lenses) are usually faster and shorter on the tele end. 2.8 is not lightning fast, but not slow either. And the Fuji "kit" is tiny (72mm) by comparison to what others are recommending as "walkabout". I could not walk comfortably for ANY distance with a camera equipped with an 18 - 300 around my neck.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

I agree that lens is a good all-round choice for the Nikon. Before I got my Fujis, that was the lens that lived on my Nik! Reasonably sharp, well built F-4. But not as good as the Fuji lens.

tturner Loc: Savannah Ga

so the answer is, there is no answer.

NJFrank Loc: New Jersey

Let me add my two cents to this long thread. Years ago when I bought my Nikon D5100 I also purchased the two kit lens, the 15-55 and the 55-200. When Sigma had the 18-250 on sale I liked what was said about the lens. So I purchased it. It is probably on my camera 95% of the time. You can label it anything you like, "walk around" or "main" lens etc. I use it for the convenience and it certainly reduces the prospect of the sensors getting dirty with changing lenses often.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Interestingly enough, back when I used Canon I went through the same process ... but in my case I went back to the original combination within six months, because I found that in most cases I knew which lens I would want before I ever started, and I didn't see any reason to lug the awkward super zoom lens around with me. Now that I'm using Pentax, I use 18-135 (*) and 55-300 lenses

(*) Pentax has been slow to put in-body AF motor behind them. The 18-55 lens kitted with my K-30 used the old "screw-drive" system, and the 18-135 is one of the few using an in-lens motor ... which is why I purchased it.

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

My walk about lens weighs just under 4 pounds. It is neither lightweight or tiny. My only complaint about this white elephant is its weight. But realistically, for a 28-300 f/3.5-5.6 with image stabilization to produce high quality images, it's going to have a lot of glass (22 elements) in it, a few of which will be quite large; and to protect all that glass, it will require a strong metal barrel.
A walkabout or walk-around lens is any lens that one can do just that, walk around with this lens mounted to one's camera. Something like a Canon EF 500 f/4L IS would not be considered a walk-around lens.

stillducky

I have neck problems and cannot use a standard neck strap at all. A shoulder strap similar to this one enables me to carry heavier lenses without discomfort. It can also be adjusted to hang where I prefer and it can be quickly pulled up for that once in a lifetime shot of something special like aunt Sally doing a handstand.

https://www.amazon.com/Tycka-Shoulder-Top-level-protection-Anti-Slip/dp/B06ZZRW8BL/ref=sr_1_5?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1498317099&sr=1-5&keywords=camera+shoulder+strap

skywolf

For me it depends on what I'm walking about. My general workhorse lens is a Nikon 35mm f1.8 on a D7100. Sharp enough that I can do serious cropping if necessary, fast enough to cover pretty much anything I need. I always carry my camera bag with me because if I don't, there will be something I desperately need. I carry a Nikon 18-55 and a Nikon 55-200. If I know I'm going to need more reach than that, I have a Tamron 150-600. But for gp's, it's that 35mm.

Harvey Loc: Pioneer, CA

I must agree with you - my pick would be a 18-300 - as my kit lens are 18-55 and 100-300 so to achieve a 18-300 I use a dual camera harness with a Canon Xti and a Canon T3i no changing lens just swing up camera and lens of choice/need - I do sometimes carry a 500mm mirrored also.