Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 29, 2006, 7:55 AM   #1
Member
 
AnhNamUSA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 96
Default

Do I need both lens :Sony SAL-18200 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 Autofocus Lens

and : Sony Zoom DT 18-70mm f3.5-5.6 Lens ???

Camera+ 18-70mm sale for $800

Camera+ 18-200mm sale for $1100

Wich one is good deal ???

Sonyhave 18-200 f/2.8 Lens or not ???

Please answer me ...thanks:??:?
AnhNamUSA is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 29, 2006, 4:20 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 851
Default

The grey color you have chosen for your text is awfully hard to read against the black background. Suggest staying with the default white text.

The 18-200 is f6.3 at 200mm and that is VERY slow for a maximum aperature. This lens will be very difficult to hand hold and get good sharp images at full zoom unless there is an AWFUL lot of light or you are using a tripod.

Personally, I prefer faster lenses, most of mine are f2.8.
amazingthailand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 29, 2006, 5:34 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 338
Default

Nobody makes a 18-200 (or any 10x zoom) with a constant f2.8 aperture. If it was possible to manufacture, it would be too large, heavy, and expensive. Every lens is a compromise of sharpness, focal length (including zoom length), brightness (aperture speed), construction quality,size, and price. You must decide where your priorities lie when you buy any lens. If you want a sharp, bright, and long lens- you must sacrifice size and price. If you need an inexpensive lens, it will likely posess few of the other desireable qualities- it may be poorly built,and/or not very sharp or bright.

To answer your question above- no, you don't need both lenses. The 18-200 tries to be an all-in-one solution, at the cost of being fairly dim. (not that the 18-70 is particularly bright) I'd get the 18-70 'kit' lens for the price difference, and buy a Tamron 28-300 xr ld newfrom Cameta on ebay for $200. This saves you $100 and gets you more coverage. ( I have this lens and it's very nice, though still a bit dim)


Mercury694 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 29, 2006, 7:15 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,551
Default

It depends on what you'll be shooting. I use the 18-200mm because most of my shoots are of equestrian events where the subject might be from within an arm's length to about 200 ft away. The 18-200 lets me shoot without having to constantly change lenses. I'll be getting a 50mm f1.4 and maybe a 30mm f1.4 for indoor stuff because they're brighter, but the 18-200 is what'll be on my camera most of the time.

In general, you're better off with a lens that covers the range that you'll use most of the time, and for most people the 18-70 is fine. Also, zoom lenses are almost never as sharp or as bright as fixed focal length lenses, so if sharpness and brightness isyour priority, buy the body and get an assortment of fixed focal length lenses (but that will cost you even more, and you might be changing lenses alot.)

If you don't know what you'll be shooting, get the 18-70 (it won't set you back too much), and see how you use it. Then you'll have a better idea of which lenses you need.

Don't try to get one lens that will do everything; you won't find one.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2006, 10:43 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
rduve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
Default

Mercury694 wrote:
Quote:
Nobody makes a 18-200 (or any 10x zoom) with a constant f2.8 aperture. If it was possible to manufacture, it would be too large, heavy, and expensive. Every lens is a compromise of sharpness, focal length (including zoom length), brightness (aperture speed), construction quality,size, and price. You must decide where your priorities lie when you buy any lens. If you want a sharp, bright, and long lens- you must sacrifice size and price. If you need an inexpensive lens, it will likely posess few of the other desireable qualities- it may be poorly built,and/or not very sharp or bright.

To answer your question above- no, you don't need both lenses. The 18-200 tries to be an all-in-one solution, at the cost of being fairly dim. (not that the 18-70 is particularly bright) I'd get the 18-70 'kit' lens for the price difference, and buy a Tamron 28-300 xr ld newfrom Cameta on ebay for $200. This saves you $100 and gets you more coverage. ( I have this lens and it's very nice, though still a bit dim)


I was going to make the exact same suggestion. Get the 18-70 kit lens and add the Tamron 28-300XR for under $200 from Cameta as long as they still have them left. And 6.3 at 300mm is not THAT slow. Here is a shot handheld indoors, no flash,at 300mm with the Tamron on the KM5D. Not that awful, is it? (But it did take me to step it up all the way to ISO1600.)



You'll be ok with this set up for 95% of all usage. If you got the money, you can add faster lenses, such as the 50mm 1.7 lens.


Rainer




rduve 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 1:47 AM.