Lens advice needed for a Canon 500D

[Katt]

Hi All,
I am heading over to Nepal in a few months for 28 days of trekking. I currently have the standard twin lens kit but would like to buy a multipurpose lens to avoid having to change lenses in dusty/windy conditions.
Can anyone recommend which lens would be better for picture quality- I am looking at:
Canon 18-200mm or the Sigma 18-250mm?
Not sure if the extra price for the Canon is because it is a better lens or if it is just because it is manufactured by Canon.
Any advice appreciated.

[bigbaz]

i went for the canon 17-85mm not as long as those lenses, but from the research i did it had better quality, it is a little on the short side, but remember with the crop factor compared to a full frame it is actually 136mmm on the long side

[Wobbles]

Hi All,
I am heading over to Nepal in a few months for 28 days of trekking. I currently have the standard twin lens kit but would like to buy a multipurpose lens to avoid having to change lenses in dusty/windy conditions.
Can anyone recommend which lens would be better for picture quality- I am looking at:
Canon 18-200mm or the Sigma 18-250mm?
Not sure if the extra price for the Canon is because it is a better lens or if it is just because it is manufactured by Canon.
Any advice appreciated.

Katt,
have a look here http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/...p5-6p3_os_c16/
and here http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/...p5-5p6_is_c16/

Neither gets really glowing reviews which is not unexpected for "cheap" super zooms which will always be a compromise optically. Neither would be a significant upgrade (possibly even worse at extremes) from your kit lenses other than for convenience of a single lens.

I would stick with your kit lenses, just be careful with changes ie. not in open moving vehicles, out of the wind, face camera body down, do 'inside' your camera bag etc. Also buy a sensor cleaning kit and learn how to use it (not that hard really). The inbuilt sensor clean does a pretty good job to.

If you really want a new lens save a few more $'s for a 70-200f4L, not as versatile but definitelly an upgrade in image quality and performance.

Cheers
John

[andylo]

If you want a real "All about" lens: Tamron AF 18-270!!!

On your 500D it equals to focal length of 27-405mm. Man, it covers everything.

I have first hand experience on this.

1) Well build
2) but it's kind of heavy, it becomes head heavy on the 500D ESPECIALLY when you use the longer side of focal length.
3) With that range, it almost covers everything I need (but read #6)
4) Lack of USM but auto focus is fast enough
5) The VC (Vibration Compensation, Tamron version of IS) is very good at low light environment
6) Wish the shorter range would be wider for landscape type pictures
7) Pic is not super sharp, its a common issue with zoom lens with huge focal length gap, but IMO it's very good, and IQ can be better than some of standard zoom lens
8) Oh, and there is a stiff turn when zoom to/from longer focal length, I thought the lens was damaged, but I have been told it's their way to combat zoom creep
9) I think you can get them for a price of steal in Harvey Norman nowadays?? Correct me if I am wrong.

[bigdazzler]

This kinda requirement always has a trade off involved. Those superzoom lenses generally do everything OK and nothing fantastic. If you are willing to sacrifice a little bit of IQ for space and weight saving, they are an ideal travel solution. Its really that simple IMO.

[Speedway]

Katt I have the sigma 18-250 originally on my 400D and now on my 7D. I am more than happy with this lens, the research I did on this type of lens pointed to the sigma being the best of the bunch but the tamron was very close, I have attached some shots from this lens.


IMG_0337bSz2.jpg

IMG_6396bSz1.jpg

IMG_5395aSz2.jpg

[soulman]

Just as an another way of looking at it, without suggesting that it's a better way: If you're going to get any kind of super-zoom type lens for your SLR, your image quality will be, arguably, only slightly better than a premium quality compact camera. You will be carrying a lot of extra weight for no decisive benefit in my opinion. If I was doing extended trekking I would either take something like Canon's G11 or pick one top quality lens like the 24-105L or maybe even an upper mid range lens like the 28-135. You won't have the range, but the shots you get will be far superior in terms of picture quality than any of the do-it-all lenses. If you go for a top quality compact, your picture quality will be in the same league as the kit lenses on the SLR but you will be carrying much less weight. Unless you're doing it primarily as a photographic journey, I can imagine there would be some value in carrying less gear.

[bigdazzler]

both Speedway and soulman make good points. I had a Tamron 18-200 once upon a time and I didnt find it to bad at all IQ wise, until the zoom barrel ceased and then it went in the bin.

I am seriously considering a G11 for my upcoming trip to Europe in November. I just got back from Thailand and found it cumbersome to be carting a bag full of bodies and lenses and god knows whatelse around with me. It was heavy and awkward, and I didnt use most of it anyway. I had a 28-75 on my camera 99% of the time.

[beckett5361]

England America and Ireland, 17 - 85 IS USM f4-5.6 lens on a 40D and its is a great all round lens for travelling yes you'll miss some shots but the 17-85 is heavy enough to carry.

[RamblinR]

IMHO just use your kit lenses. Practice changing them at home before you go. Get it down to a fine art. They will give you better image quality than a zoom lens.

If you really feel that you need an all in one zoom lens the from most the the reviews I have read they all seem to have compromises. I have used the Canon 18-200mm and it was a nice lens. IS is really good. I see there is one currently for sale on this site so might be worth checking it out.