Canon Lens vs. Tamron
Mike Wilcox
roughly the same price I can get the body with 2 Canon IS lenses (18-55 and
55-250) or the same body with 1 Tamron 18-200 ( Tamron Zoom Super Wide Angle
18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di-II LD Aspherical (IF) Macro Lens for Canon Digital
EOS)
Any recommendations on the two directions on lenses?
Thanks,
Mike
Ofnuts
AF normally requires lenses ast least as fast as f5.6, will your AF work
(and work fast enough) at f6.3?
--
Bertrand
J. Clarke
Unless you absolutely positively _need_ an 18-200 for some reason go
with the two lens kit.
Reasons:
The two Canon lenses are image stabilized, the Tamron isn't (the first
IS, or as Tamron calls it "VC" superzoom from Tamron is the 18-270,
which is brand new and about twice the price of their 18-200).
The 18-55 IS is optically a remarkably good lens--it's not perfect but
it's far, far better than the Tamron is in that range. Canon cheaped
on the mechanical parts, not the glass. The 55-250 is kind of so-so
for a Canon lens but again it's got better edge sharpness than the
Tamron and you get an additional 50mm plus a hair more aperture.
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
ransley
To get the most out of the sensor none of those lenses are good
enough.
J. Clarke
And you know this how?
Archibald
wrote:
It comes down to how much quality you want vs cost and convenience.
Only you can decide that.
You can check out reviews on these lenses on the Web... for instance
at
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/45-canon-eos-aps-c
The Tamron has a small maximum aperture at the long end and will
probably not autofocus there.
Archibald
JC Dill
> ransley wrote:
>> On Nov 23, 9:35 pm, Mike Wilcox <m...@nick-zack.com> wrote:
>>> I'm looking to buy a Canon Xsi and am wondering what lens(es) to
>>> get. For roughly the same price I can get the body with 2 Canon IS
>>> lenses (18-55 and 55-250) or the same body with 1 Tamron 18-200 (
>>> Tamron Zoom Super Wide Angle 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di-II LD
>>> Aspherical (IF) Macro Lens for Canon Digital EOS)
>>>
>>> Any recommendations on the two directions on lenses?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Mike
>> To get the most out of the sensor none of those lenses are good
>> enough.
>
> And you know this how?
My first DSLR was the Canon 300d (Digital Rebel). I bought it with the
kit lens, then bought a used 75-300 zoom. Then I shopped and found a
used 70-200 f2.8 L IS. The difference in the image quality between
photos shot with the 75-300 and the 70-200 was dramatic, even on that
first generation DSLR sensor. I never used the 75-300 again, and
eventually sold it without having used it for several years. I kept it
as a "backup lens" but it was in a box in the closet, not in my camera
bag. If my 70-200 broke in the field, the back-up lens wasn't going to
do me any good. I could borrow or rent a better back-up lens (another
70-200 or the 100-400 etc.) just as quickly as pulling the 75-300 out of
the closet, so I sold it.
I sold the kit lens with the body, but rarely used it. Again, the image
quality just wasn't on a par with the images I got with the 70-200.
Today I still use the same 70-200 on my 1DMII, or my 24-70 f2.8 L lens.
Your photos are never any better than the glass used to gather and focus
the light on the sensor. IMHO you will never regret spending money on
good glass.
jc
Barry Lancaster
Until you find out that not one of them are figured to diffraction-limited
precision. "A fool and his money are soon parted." Then you move onto other
styles of cameras where that is accomplished regularly. I left dlsrs behind long
ago.
George Kerby
On 11/24/08 11:35 AM, in article 4apli4hmjs3fbo7nj...@4ax.com,
"Barry Lancaster" <barryla...@lancasterprivate.net> wrote:
> I left dlsrs behind
> long
> ago.
>
But what about DSLR cameras?
ransley
>
> - Show quoted text -
dpreview spelled it out clearly, I trust their opinion and test
methods.
JoeyJacobs
wrote:
I wouldn't. I've found so many errors in the way they test things. I file them
along with all other net-created urban legends--a possibility but by no means
the correct one until verified by others.
ransley
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:14:52 -0800 (PST), ransley <Mark_Rans...@Yahoo.com>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Its basic, Its a good camera, the sensor needs primes to get its full
potential, if you need independant verification on that you will be
forever lost as you must be.
Luke Clannion
wrote:
>On Nov 24, 4:35 pm, JoeyJacobs <j...@spamfree100yrs.org> wrote:
Oh yes, nobody else in the world will ever test the same popular consumer lens
independently of the dpreview god of yours. People will be lost forever if they
aren't saved by your proved-faulty god.
hint: your god has mud feet, not just clay ones