has anyone used a TAMRON 18-250mm lens

[soulman]

It's perhaps worth noting that the main quality advantage of an SLR over a good compact is determined by lenses and that this class of lens is not one that will give you a noticeable improvement. I would recommend something like Canon's 28-135 over this, or, even better, a 50mm f/1.8 (best value) or f/1.4. Sure it's fixed focal length, but you will get really sharp images that make it worth the trouble of carrying an SLR. A greater focal length range is not necessarily an advantage. A 50mm lens may not 'cover' every situation, but the shots you get with it will not be limited by the lens and it's one you won't grow out of. Most of the great photojournalism of the 20th century was shot with fixed short focal length lenses.

The 40D is a great little camera and it will produce outstanding results with good glass. A simple lens to start with will help you to hone your skills much better than a super-zoom because it will force you to put your attention toward the image rather than the equipment. It will reward your diligence much more too!

[Kym]

It's perhaps worth noting that the main quality advantage of an SLR over a good compact is determined by lenses and that this class of lens is not one that will give you a noticeable improvement

Not quite correct, if you work within the limits of almost any lens you can get great results. I.e. don't use it wide open.
Refer: http://www.ausphotography.net.au/for...k_sharp_images

Even the best primes can be slightly soft at the edges wide open.
Also for beginners the main learning goals are composition and exposure and not so much pixel peeping.

The OP has said they want a lens for travel and one thing to avoid is changing lenses - so its a reasonable compromise.

I agree a 50/1.8 or similar is a great thing to add to your kit, I just don't think it will but it for the travel requirement.

[soulman]

...if you work within the limits of almost any lens you can get great results.

Not really. Good if you're careful, yes; fine for some uses, sure; but not great. I think you can get good results if you define 'within the limits' of a super zoom as being a small part of its range and only with certain subjects, which kind of limits its value. High quality lenses have many advantages, such as contrast & colour to name just two, and no amount of working within limitations can remove those differences. Sure, one can get reasonable results from most lenses if they're used carefully, but that takes a bit of skill to do and the same can be said for compact cameras, which is the point I was making.

Also for beginners the main learning goals are composition and exposure and not so much pixel peeping.

Which is exactly why I suggest a fixed lens. It makes you think about your image and how to get what you want, rather than your equipment.

The OP has said they want a lens for travel and one thing to avoid is changing lenses - so its a reasonable compromise.

And another reasonable compromise could be to forego a wide range of focal lengths so that what you do capture will make good use of the equipment you're lugging. I carry a very limited range of focal lengths if I'm not travelling specifically for photography - either a 16-35 or 24-105 on a full frame - and it is absolutely my preferred compromise.

[LYDIA]

All of your comments are great! So keep them coming!

I'm leaning towards a.. Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens
I had a borrow of someone elses and thought it was great.