RichardTaylor wrote:
Practically everything - that means more than one lens.
A superzoom, ~18-200+mm can be very convienient and fine for hand holding in good light levels, or if you can shoot long exposures. However it will be much to slow (optically) for shooting hand held in low light and possibly to slow (mechanically) to aquire and track fast moving objects.
I do own a Tamron 18-250 and it is an OK lens (not great) and I mostly use it when I have to travel real light, in he daytime, and I want to have a lot of versatility over a reasonable focal length range, in a relatively small package.
You may want to think more than one lens (you do not have to buy them all at once). From personal experience if you buy better lenses stright up (I didn't always) you will save money in the long run.
In good light or shooting long exposures an F4 will be OK
For an ultrawide I use a Tokina 12-24 F4 - It is an OK lens however nowdays there are better choices available.
For a mid range tele I use a Canon 70-200 F4 L (it is a great lens)
For a long tele (birds and motor racing) I have used a Canon 100-400 f4.5-f5.6 IS L (it is a a great lens), but nowdays use a Sigma 150-500 which is just an OK lens.
If you want to shoot hand held in relatively low light think fast lenses, at least f2.8. Fast zooms can get very expensive very quicky. I do own Tamron 17-50, however it is a great lens as it does have difficulty in aquiring focus in low light.
See my previous reply in this thread for some other suggestions.
Practically everything - that means more than one ... (
show quote)
I know practically everything means more then one lens, I dont want to jump into deep waters and drown myself with everything at once. Was just curious to see which lenses were capable of everyday use and low light. I will purchase those others later on.
I am keeping all these lenses written down on a pad of paper to see which is which, and which ones i will buy next! Thanks to everyone for replying with advice and tips you all ROCK!!!! Keep them coming lol