Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 1, 2009, 12:39 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

The best superzoom lens available costs twice what the Canon 55-250 goes for, and it's not nearly as good. Think how much a superzoom would cost that was as good as the 55-250!

Making a dSLR lens is more complicated that making a P&S lens because of a number of factors:

  • The lens must be further away from the image sensor in order to make room for the mirror box. [/*]
  • The image sensor is larger, so the optical elements must be larger.
[/*]
That's why it's easier to make a superzoom lens for a P&S than for a dSLR.

If you really want one, there are some out there that might be adequate for most purposes, but a superzoom P&S will cost less and probably work better for most purposes.

You bought a dSLR. One of it's major advantages is the ability to use a lens specifically designed for what you want to shoot the way you want to shoot it. Taking advantage of it's advanced capabilities means changing lenses once in a while.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2009, 7:19 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
hercules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sparta, Greece
Posts: 2,649
Default

Out of those lenses I picked the Tamron 18-270 VC it is a pretty good lens, and i also sold my 70-300 IS and 17-85 IS i didn't see any difference in image quality when viewing pictures on screen, another option would be to look at the Fuji S100fs i also had that and regret selling it i really enjoyed the Fuji
hercules is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2009, 10:21 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

hercules wrote:
Quote:
... i didn't see any difference in image quality when viewing pictures on screen ...
Yes, the quality of the output device has as much to do with the result as the quality of the input device. If you only ever look at your images on the screen, you probably wouldn't see any difference in image quality.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2009, 10:19 AM   #14
Member
 
daniell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 70
Default

Thanks for the info Hercules!

I already have a Panasonic FZ18 with 18x zoom. What I wanted to know is if there were any good ultrazooms out there. And which of them users regard as the best (in my point of view the sharpest).

It should be more of you who use ultrazooms out there. Please post your opinion of your brand here.

//Daniel.
daniell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 12, 2009, 2:02 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
a-beginner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 197
Default

The Canon 17-55 f2.8 has very good reviews for a short zoom.

Check out http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

On the long zooms, the Tamron 28-300 VC (VC is Tamron's version of image stabilization), check out these photos:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisof...7605021024366/

a-beginner is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:34 PM.