Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
A 28-200mm lens is called "Having your cake and eating it too".I want zoomlens for Maxxum 7d, perhaps from 28 - 200 - what lens
for about 400$ do you recommend? or... what 2 lenses that cover the
same area (or maybe up to 300) do you recommend for about the same
price (total) (or perhaps i'd let it cost at most 500$ for 2
lenses).
Thanx in advance!
Robert
--A 28-200mm lens is called "Having your cake and eating it too".I want zoomlens for Maxxum 7d, perhaps from 28 - 200 - what lens
for about 400$ do you recommend? or... what 2 lenses that cover the
same area (or maybe up to 300) do you recommend for about the same
price (total) (or perhaps i'd let it cost at most 500$ for 2
lenses).
Thanx in advance!
Robert
It doesn't work in photography, or at least, not yet with the
limited lens technology we have.
But if you plan on walking around a lot and taking a lot of urban
photography, You will need three lenses.
A normal zoom (24-70mm), a super wide or Fisheye (10-22), and a
Telephoto or Telezoom lens(200 or 70-200).
But being realistic, if I had to choose one lens out of those 3 I
just suggested.
I'd blow my 400 bux on a Sigma 24-60mm F2.8.
This new lens is made specifically for Digital SLRs. And i've
compared its optical quality to a 24-70mm F2.8L by Canon,
outperforms it in every range (except the 10mm that the sigma can't
reach).
so basically for around 385 usd shipped, you'll have a 36-105mm
lens, which I think is a great compromise, plus it has magnificent
color grabbing ability as well as super sharpness.
-stan
I want zoomlens for Maxxum 7d, perhaps from 28 - 200 - what lens
for about 400$ do you recommend? or... what 2 lenses that cover the
same area (or maybe up to 300) do you recommend for about the same
price (total) (or perhaps i'd let it cost at most 500$ for 2
lenses).
Thanx in advance!
Robert
A 28-200mm lens is called "Having your cake and eating it too".
It doesn't work in photography, or at least, not yet with the
limited lens technology we have.
It all depends upon what you are after with your photography. The
more extreme the focal length, the longer the zoom range, the wider
the focal length, the more compact the design, and the lower the
cost, the greater the compromise in image quality and performance.
I am sure you already know this.
For casual shooting, there are a number of options, Tamron 24-135,
Sigma 18-125, Minolta 24-105, and Minolta 24-85--all which will do
well if not shot at their extremes if image quality is a concern.
For more serious use: lenses of better caliber should be your first
consideration.
The lenses that offer the best performance to cost ratio for
walkaround zooms:
Minolta/Tamron 17-35/2.8-4 D
Minolta/Tamron 28-75/2.8 D
These IMHO are the best zoom lenses to use when image quality and
cost are a concern.
--
Vance Zachary
http://www.pbase.com/photoworkszach
http://www.photoworksbyzachary.com
It all depends upon what you are after with your photography. The
more extreme the focal length, the longer the zoom range, the wider
the focal length, the more compact the design, and the lower the
cost, the greater the compromise in image quality and performance.
I am sure you already know this.
For casual shooting, there are a number of options, Tamron 24-135,
Sigma 18-125, Minolta 24-105, and Minolta 24-85--all which will do
well if not shot at their extremes if image quality is a concern.
For more serious use: lenses of better caliber should be your first
consideration.
The lenses that offer the best performance to cost ratio for
walkaround zooms:
Minolta/Tamron 17-35/2.8-4 D
Minolta/Tamron 28-75/2.8 D
These IMHO are the best zoom lenses to use when image quality and
cost are a concern.
--
Vance Zachary
http://www.pbase.com/photoworkszach
http://www.photoworksbyzachary.com
As everyone points out the bigger the zoom range the more
compromises you get in image quality, size etc with your lenses.
If you want just one lens then the Sigma 18-125mm thats coming out
will get you a useful range from wide-angle to telephoto (nearly
28-200mm in 35mm turns) and I think Tamron have one in a similar
range coming? But I'm not sure.
If you want to break that down a little and spend more money and
have more lenses but better quality than an all in one solution
will give you then here are a few suggestions.
For wide-angle the Tamron or Minolta 17-35mm f2.8-4 will give you a
good wide-to standard zoom (25-50mm in 35mm terms) - I have the
Tamron version of this lens and its pretty good.
If wide-angle isn't important or to go along with the 17-35mm then
consider either the Minolta 24-105mm f3.5-4.5 or Minolta 28-75mm
f2.8. The 28-75mm is probably better quality optically but the
24-105mm has a more useful range - the extra 4mm at the wide-angle
end is quite significant and it means that the zoom range starts at
36mm in 35mm equiv. rather than 42mm. I use the 24-105mm when I
just want to carry one lens around with me all day though its range
on a DSLR isn't as useful as it was on a 35mm SLR. The weaknesses
of the 24-105mm are that there is distortion at the 24mm end which
may make it less suitable for architectural subjects and its not so
great wide open. It is however good quality for a relatively wide
ranging zoom esp. when stopped down a little and is compact and
well made. The 28-75mm is a bit better optically and gives you the
constant f2.8 max aperture which is good for low light etc but you
lose a little of the range. Either lens is good, its just a
question of which is better for your uses.
At the telephoto lens you mentioned the Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 APO
Macro - I saw a review which said it was the best telephoto zoom in
its price range not long ago so for the price its a good option.
If you want to spend more money the Minolta 100-300mm f4-5.6 (D) is
a bit more expensive but better optically.
Its difficult to make recommendations for photography because once
you start spending money there is no limit to how mcuh you can end
up spending! I think most people just start with some el cheapo
lens and then build up a more expensive lens collection as their
interest grows and they want to overcome the limitations of their
initial lens choices.
I owned the Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 APO Macro (version 1) years back. Optically, it indeed is as good as it gets in that price range, but mechanically it is (or in my case: was) a hopeless piece of junk. After about 2 years, AF and zoom became increasingly difficult (ever increasing mechanical resistance), rendering it practically useless.At the telephoto lens you mentioned the Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 APO
Macro - I saw a review which said it was the best telephoto zoom in
its price range not long ago so for the price its a good option.
If you want to spend more money the Minolta 100-300mm f4-5.6 (D) is
a bit more expensive but better optically.
Its difficult to make recommendations for photography because once
you start spending money there is no limit to how mcuh you can end
up spending! I think most people just start with some el cheapo
lens and then build up a more expensive lens collection as their
interest grows and they want to overcome the limitations of their
initial lens choices.
--I want zoomlens for Maxxum 7d, perhaps from 28 - 200 - what lens
for about 400$ do you recommend? or... what 2 lenses that cover the
same area (or maybe up to 300) do you recommend for about the same
price (total) (or perhaps i'd let it cost at most 500$ for 2
lenses).
Thanx in advance!
Robert
Vance:
Continuing with your valuable list in the better performance
category, what zoom lenses would you list that extend to the 300
territory?
I want two lenses, a zoom that is wide but not necessarily ultra
wide, and one that is a telephoto.
Mark
... Lucas
--I want zoomlens for Maxxum 7d, perhaps from 28 - 200 - what lens
for about 400$ do you recommend? or... what 2 lenses that cover the
same area (or maybe up to 300) do you recommend for about the same
price (total) (or perhaps i'd let it cost at most 500$ for 2
lenses).
Thanx in advance!
Robert
KM Maxxum 7D, Tokina 17/f3.5, Tamron 24-135/f3.5-5.6, KM
100-300/f4.5-5.6 APO(D), KM 50/f1.7, Sigma 50/f2.8 macro, KM A1
Super Zoom, the Tokina 24-200 and Tamron 28-300 seem to get the
best feedback. The Tokina is cheaper ($260ish vs. $360ish),
heavier, and has a higher percentage of positive feedback, but
significantly less reviews.
Adding a low light lens, the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and Sigma 24-60
f/2.8 get the best reviews, the Tokina 28-70 f/2.8 gets decent
reviews, and once again is $100 cheaper if you are on a budget.
The Tamron 24-135 gets great reviews, as well. What I was looking
for was a two lens system that covered 24-200 and one lense that
was good in low light. The Sigma 24-60 f/2.8 and one of the decent
70-300 lenses would also have accomplished that.
... Lucas
--I want zoomlens for Maxxum 7d, perhaps from 28 - 200 - what lens
for about 400$ do you recommend? or... what 2 lenses that cover the
same area (or maybe up to 300) do you recommend for about the same
price (total) (or perhaps i'd let it cost at most 500$ for 2
lenses).
Thanx in advance!
Robert
KM Maxxum 7D, Tokina 17/f3.5, Tamron 24-135/f3.5-5.6, KM
100-300/f4.5-5.6 APO(D), KM 50/f1.7, Sigma 50/f2.8 macro, KM A1
I want zoomlens for Maxxum 7d, perhaps from 28 - 200 - what lens
for about 400$ do you recommend? or... what 2 lenses that cover the
same area (or maybe up to 300) do you recommend for about the same
price (total) (or perhaps i'd let it cost at most 500$ for 2
lenses).
Thanx in advance!
Robert
