Heimdall

Surfmom, my thoughts are: don't take a chance on a lens that has been causing problems. You may think you have it fixed, only for the gremlins to reappear during your trip.

Were you thinking of bringing only the 28-200? Even if it works perfectly, you may wish you had a wide-angle lens with you. Were it me, I would take the 18-55 kit lens, and either include the Canon 75-300, or look for another lens to complement the 18-55. I would stick with Canon glass, and consider their 55-200mm, or another 28-200 if you find that most useful.

rkkwan

A 28-200 is definitely not wide enough on a digital Rebel for traveling.

I suggest getting another 18-55 for cheap (they can be have for <$100). Or if you're willing to spend a bit more, the 17-85IS - which can be handheld for low-light shoot, eliminating the need of a tripod for travel. Or the Tamrom or Sigma 17/18-50 with 2.8 aperture. All <$500.

surfmom

thanks guys for the input

I have the 18-55 -- I was planning on taking that. It is relatively wide and its a lighter lens and easy to carry.

I tried the 55-200 recently and wished it would go out further, so I'm thinking about re-investing (is that the term to justify my madness?) in another 28-200. Probably a Canon since my Tamron pre-dates digital.

thanks for the input!

rkkwan

surfmom -

Oh, I thought you meant you have problem with the Canon. But I guess you mean you have problem with the Tamron. These early pre-digital era 3rd party lens often have problem with the latest digital camera, as Canon has no obligation to make sure their cameras will work with the 3rd party lenses.

Tamron has a 18-200, and a new 18-250. You may want to look at those.

Canon's only "super zoom" offering is a 28-300 L lens, which is $2,000 and weighs 3.7lb. And it's still not wide enough.

On a digital Rebel, you really need a lens to start from 17/18mm. Or even wider if you like. I used my 10-22 a lot on my recent trip to Sicily and Amalfi Coast.

Heimdall

Surfmom, I must be missing something, but how would a 28-200mm lens "go out further" than a 55-200mm? If you plan to carry the 18-55 anyway, then it seems to me that all you would get is an overlap between 28mm and 55mm with that combination of lenses. The 55-200 would take up where the 18-55 leaves off.

I'll have to confess I'm a Nikon user, and am lusting for their new 18-200 VR lens. Maybe something similar will come out for Canon, and that would give you the range you are looking for with only one lens to carry.

surfmom

Thanks guys.

rkkwan, I confess I'm drooling over the idea of a 18-250 lens. I quickly looked at reviews and while there is some distortion (particularly at 18mm), it has gotten some good reviews. Its still pretty new on the market, so not a ton of user information.

Heimdall, you are correct, I was typing too fast (and having kids needing attention) and didn't make sense. What I meant was that the 55mm 'bottom' of the 55-200 was too zoomed in. I wanted to be able to pull back farther and couldn't with that lens. You are also right that the lenses would overlap which is probably overkill, but I love the idea of one lens that I'm not swapping out. I'm frequently in classroom situations where I have to move fast and don't have time to swap lenses.

So... the bottom line is that my instinct told me its time for a new digital-happy lens and you've confirmed it. I will call the local camera store (a 'real' camera store, not a chain) and see if they have it. I like to patronize them b/c I want to keep my business locally.

thanks guys!

btw, here are my photos from Paris 2006 -- mostly taken with the Tamron 28-200.

www.pbase.com/jsemmer

flygirl

The std 18-55 that comes with the camera is a pretty basic lens. Nothing to write home about (although it did take the ABQ Balloon Fiesta photos I recently posted here, and they turned out pretty well - all outside photos though in optimal conditions).

I am sure she meant "go wide" when she said "go out".

Surfmom, I'd definitely get new lenses. I'm getting a new P&S (SD800) to take with me along with the Canon equipment here (and debating another L model wide zoom) because I can't bear the thought of my camera going bad on me, on vacation. My SD500 which I had bought two years ago is starting to get cranky and I just don't trust it now.

rkkwan

Instead of the Tamron 18-200/250 as an all-purpose travel lens, I think one should look at Canon's 17-85IS. Yes, it doesn't have as much reach, but 85mm is a medium telephoto on a digital Rebel (equivalent to about 135mm on full frame).

Image quality of the 17-85 is decent, the distortion at the wide end not as bad as the Tamrons (though still significant), and IS is very effective. I take so many interior shots of Italian churches with it, all handheld.

It's about $500 new. Or about $400 used on eBay. I bought mine used and then later sold it for about the same money.

flygirl

rk, thanks for the heads up. that looks like a good lens and compared to the one I just bought it's dirt cheap. (why is it once you get over the sticker shock of the first one, what you might have thought expensive before is hardly a stretch anymore?)

I've heard good things about IS. it is also really light. Is an IS also an "L" or would it be called L-IS if it were L quality?

rkkwan

flygirl -

Did you look at the Sigma 30/1.4 when you decide to go for the Canon 35/1.4? It's not "L" quality, but it costs about 1/3 of the L.

But tell me about expensive Canon lens. I sold my 17-85 to get the 17-55/2.8 IS. $960, and it's not even "L", it's not weather sealed (I already get dust), it doesn't come with a hood or pouch. But one look at the pictures, and it's all worth it.

Anyways, many of the "L" telephoto and zoom lens do have IS. They just called something like "70-200/2.8L IS".

---

surfmom -

I still had a first generation Tamron 28-200 for Canon. Bought it around 1993, and used it for a 3-month trip to the Middle East in 1995.

One important thing Tamron's EOS lens doesn't have is the ring-type USM focusing motor. Once you're used a Canon lens with one, you'll feel anything else slow and noisy (even if they're not actually that slow). The Canons focus silently and extremely quickly.

flygirl

rk - I glanced at it, but I wanted the best. If you buy quality, you are happier with it in the long run.

I too heard about the dust problems on the other one you bought. bummer.

thanks for the info - very helpful.