The perfect all round lens??????

Hi

Firstly thanks for a great Forum, been reading it now for a few months.

I have a 40D which is well beyond my skill level, so went and bought a G12 thinking this might be a good solution for learning on and perhaps grow into an SLR later. However I find the G12 to fiddly for my big fat fingers. So G12 is bound for ebay and with the proceeds I will invest in a lens or 2 for the 40D.

So to my question, what is a good all round lens for my particular needs. I am most interested in general photos of the Kids and some nice portraits, my son plays Rugby and I am desperately trying to get some good shots of him in action, also I occasionally have some delusional thoughts that I am a wee bit “arty” and would love to take some nice landscapes and macro`s.

To summarise I want a lens or lenses that do everything and costs less than £500 in total.
The good news for me is there seems to be a few options:

• Nifty 250
• 70-200
• 70-300
• 18-270 (I love the idea of this)
• 18- 105 + 2 x exdender

I know this seems a wee bit wanting my cake and eating it, however if you take into account the excellent “all in one” solutions out there now, (G12, LX5, P7000,FZ35 or SX20is, to name but a few) It would seem to be a reasonable expectation that I could buy a good body, add 1 or 2 inexpensive lenses and get better results than the “all in one” cameras out there, then still have the option to upgrade the lenses as my pocket or ability dictate.
Your thoughts, opinions or rants will be appreciated.

Thanks In Advance
Andy

There is no such lens !
I would suggest getting a Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 non-VC for the landscape and such , and the Canon 70-200mm f/4 for the rugby. Then save your money for a macro .

Depends what you're shooting and aperture you might need. If f/2.8 is a must then either the Canon 17-55 or the Tamron 17-50 non-VC (because it seems to have better IQ). If you don't need it for low light and want something more for walk-around, Canon 18-200, Canon 24-105, Canon 15-85, Tamron 28-75, Sigma 24-70, Canon 24-70. Depends on budget too...

i'd look at the tamron 18-270mm...shots of your son in action will need to be done in good light though...but if you are just looking for one lens that's the one i'd consider...however...i​'d think about more than one if i were in your shoes

EF-S 18-200.. not the best, but can do it all..

24-70 f 2.8

I know the Tamron 18-270 has a $150 rebate in the States right now, putting the after-rebate cost at $480, so you can try and find a deal on your end (assuming UK since you've got 500 pounds to spend... ). This lens would do fairly well for everything, assuming the rugby matches you're after aren't at night. If you are looking for the best all-in-one option to get you started, this is it.

Keep in mind that your final option - 18-105 + extender - wouldn't AF after you put the extender on the lens (your camera needs the maximum f/stop to be f/5.6 to AF; the 2x teleconverter will cause the light going into the camera to be reduced by 2 stops, making a lens with an f/2.8 aperture report at f/5.6).

CountryBoy wrote in post #11155820
There is no such lens !
I would suggest getting a Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 non-VC for the landscape and such , and the Canon 70-200mm f/4 for the rugby. Then save your money for a macro .

This is an excellent suggestion. Also, beware of 2X extenders. They do pretty well with long telephotos that cost $2500 on up, but you'll lose quite a bit of image quality on less expensive lenses.

nightcat wrote in post #11155899
This is an excellent suggestion. Also, beware of 2X extenders. They do pretty well with long telephotos that cost $2500 on up, but you'll lose quite a bit of image quality on less expensive lenses.

70-200 f2.8 works fine.. at least for me.. and yes, you lose some IQ, but it is still decent

I've been thrilled with my 15-85, but I'm on a 7D and it's fantastic high ISO performance certainly helps.I gotta imagine that 24-105 on a full frame is just about perfection.

24-105 on a full frame, crop might be a different story

the tamron 18-250mm isn't that bad of a lens. considering the cheap price and great focal range, it performs fairly well.

roosterslayer wrote in post #11155942
the tamron 18-250mm isn't that bad of a lens. considering the cheap price and great focal range, it performs fairly well.

I'd hate to shoot any type of sports with it .

Look in to adapters and pick up a cheap olympus or nikon macro 50mm for your canon, maybe. Adapters available on ebay for many different brands to eos. No af or auto aperture, though. 55-250 is supposed to be good. 17-50 tamron too, 2.8 would be handy. Various 75-300 type lenses, I got a 75-300 tamron which is excellent up to about 200mm. Many different out there for under $100US used. Slow, though, shooting rugby in good or low light? 28-75 tamron is probably great but not wide on 1.6 crop. Get lens with 17 or 18. The 18-55 IS is a pretty good lens and not too expensive, coupled with the 55-250 or 75-300 you're in good shape. For rugby , you will almost always need higher shutter speeds to stop action, so IS might not help much. If the 40D is too complicated, set it to green. Better, use Tv for sports, lets you pick shutter speed. Probably want at least 1/500, 1/1000th or more better.

If you can get close, the 135/2.8 canon might be the cheapest with good speed for rugby. Available used for sometimes under US$300. 200/2.8 probably better.