Zoom Lens

[ajsdad]

Curious, I have a d40 and a 70-300 lens that I absolutely love, but it well, looks like a large lens. I would like to take the camera into some sporting events in which I have been told that the camera is fine, but the large lens is a no-no. So my question is, what is the smallest zoom lens out there. Something that won't alarm the security folks at stadiums.


Ed

[DStanic]

The Sigma 18-200mm comes to mind.
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3324&navigator=6

I don't know how it compares for image quality though. As far as "regular" telephoto zooms, the Tamron 75-300 f/4-5.6 I had was much smaller (and lighter) than my Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, which is big and heavy.

[_aravena]

That's the dumbest thing I've hear. The lens is a no no? Yet people probably bring in S5's and other super zoom cameras.

Still, want the most disguised one that'll deliver some good performance is 70-300 DO. if you can't afford it maybe wait for Canon's new 18-200 and find out if it'll have USM which is what you'll need to keep up with players.

[Wilt]

That's the dumbest thing I've hear. The lens is a no no? Yet people probably bring in S5's and other super zoom cameras.

Still, want the most disguised one that'll deliver some good performance is 70-300 DO. if you can't afford it maybe wait for Canon's new 18-200 and find out if it'll have USM which is what you'll need to keep up with players.


"If you have a huge lens, then you must be a pro. If you have a point and shoot with a 10:1 zoom, you are just a snaphooting fool whose camera will try to illuminate the scene from 100' away with a flash that is effective only to 15'. Pros sell shots, the snapshooter will get underexposed shots. No big lens, no worry."

[_aravena]

Depends on the situation and a 70-300 hardly looks like a pro lens.

[yogestee]

Depends on the situation and a 70-300 hardly looks like a pro lens.

To who??