Superzooms- which one (or not at all)

G

glenm

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3
Name
Glen
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,
I have a canon 500d with 18-55 and 55-250 lenses.
The problem I have is I can't always decide which lens I need when I am out, and it's not always convenient to carry both lenses.

So, I'm thinking about getting a superzoom.
Either the:
Sigma 18-250
Tamron 18-270
Tamron 18-270 PZD

I think I have eliminated the standard Tamron, as reviews state that it is slow to focus.

My question is, what is the real life experience of either of a superzoom. I know they won't have the IQ of a top quality lens, but would I notice the difference between a superzoom and my existing kit lenses?

Any advice appreciated
Thanks
Glen
 
I wouldn't call any of them a super zoom. 400mm+ yes but a max of 300mm is quite common for a regular zoom.
You already have the 55-250 so I don't think any of them would be a good enough improvement.
Going for a 300 or 400mm f/4 or the sigma 150-500 would be an option depending on what you want from the lens.
 
Last edited:
I think that the point has been missed in the above post. A superzoom is a zoom with a very wide range, such as those mentioned by glenm.

I know how tempting such a lens is, and I used a Tamron 18-270 for a while. But it's not going to have such a good performance as lenses covering a more narrow range. There must inevitably be more performance compromises in such a complicated lens (for example the maximum focal length reduces as you focus on closer objects).

I abandoned the 18-270 and went back to changing lenses as necessary, and immediately got better results.
 
I bought a Sigma 18-200 brand new from Jessops for about £140 3 years ago when I had my 400d. In terms of convenience, it was brilliant. Image quality was quite acceptable, but in no way exceptional in any conditions. They really are a compromise, but if you're looking for ease of use rather than the last word in 'perfection', it's worth considering.
 
I've tried a couple over recent years, and I've always felt compromised by the image quality. There's something irritating about knowing you've got a lens in your bag that will provide a better image.

Of course for some people they're wonderful, and it's easy to make a case for "it's what's in the shot that matters", but they're not for me.
 
There are compromises to be had and it's a personal choice if you are happy to accept those compromises.

They are very very convenient when out and about, as you aren't having to carry another lens and have to find somewhere safe / not in everyone's way to swap lenses over, but they do lack in quality over the equivalent multiple lenses - this is the compromise. You may well be happy with the results, whilst others may not.

My advice would be to try one out if you can and see if you are happy with the results. After all, except for trying to swap lenses, the 18-55 isn't that comber some to carry around if you needed something wider than the 55-250.

Hope this is of help...
 
I've seen some really good photos come from the Tamron 18-270 PZD with a friends 50D. I would of had one but I'd decided I was going FF so it was no good for me. I've got a 60D and a 5D3 and all my lenses are EF mount, but I wouldn't hesitate to use one on the 60D if I only wanted to take 1 lens. You're not going to get the same quality as a prime or an L lens, but you have the convenience of 1 lens and a cut down cost too. There's some examples of the VC version here to have a look at http://www.motleypixel.com/reviews/index.htm?openfolder=Tamron Primes/Tamron SP 90mm f2.8 Di Macro/
 
gblades said:
I wouldn't call any of them a super zoom. 400mm+ yes but a max of 300mm is quite common for a regular zoom.
You already have the 55-250 so I don't think any of them would be a good enough improvement.
Going for a 300 or 400mm f/4 or the sigma 150-500 would be an option depending on what you want from the lens.
Click to expand...

They are super-zooms. A super-zoom isn't one that goes to 500mm plus, it's one with a super flexible range. For instance, the Canon 18-135 is a superzoom, as it's a 135mm lens that can also go as wide as 18mm. A standard zoom can't do that.

On the subject, for the OP, the Canon 18-135 IS is very good, I use one as my standard walkabout when I'm not shooting anything specific.
 
Last edited:
As Jim advices the 18-135 IS is a very good lens and a very good focal length
IQ is better than the 55-250 which I have owned and sold as I wasn't that impressed by it. The problem with the list that you have selected is the drop in IQ so I would go for the 18-135 or the 15-85 (actually I did go for the 15-85 and couldn't be happier) just gotta add a 70-300 to go with it.
 
gblades said:
I wouldn't call any of them a super zoom. 400mm+ yes but a max of 300mm is quite common for a regular zoom.
You already have the 55-250 so I don't think any of them would be a good enough improvement.
Going for a 300 or 400mm f/4 or the sigma 150-500 would be an option depending on what you want from the lens.
Click to expand...

they are superzooms. Superzooms aren't super because they go over a certain focal length, they are superzooms because of the zoom factor, 18mm to 250 is big.

i wouldn't touch them with a barge pole personally. Convienience suffers the image quality. I know which I prefer.
 
I've got a sigma 18-250 as I was like you never know which lens to take out or was forever changing it but overhaule I'm pleased with the shots I get from it see my post's most are taken with that lens only the last couple of posts have been with a sigma 100-300 f4 lens. The only problem i had with the sigma 18-250 was that I started to get lens creep but soon put a stop to that with a thin strip of cycle inner tube (elastic band will do) pushed over the lens against the zoom ring can't see it and lens works as before but as never crept since.
 
Thanks all for the input and advice. I think I may well go for the sigma as an all-round/can't be bothered to carry two lenses/will put up with a drop in IQ option...

Cheers
Glen
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top