I am never happy. Get rid of two lenses for one?

[herc182]

Right here is my "dilemma" (i can never write that without thinking about people with REAL problems!).
I have the sigma 18-50 and nikon 55-200 (as per signature). However, on the last few shooting occasions i have found that its a pain in the ass changing lenses all the time.
Now, what i could do (as i am sure a lot of people have debated) is sell those two and get an "all in" one.
The obvious (and least likely) candidate is the 18-200 VR nikon one. Photo quality is supposedly very nice. However there are the tamron and sigma alternatives too.
What i am asking is whether it will be a massive hit in quality of images (by getting rid of these two very good lenses) or whether it would be acceptable.
I miss a few shots because I just cant be bothered to change lens. But are these few shots missed worth the hassle of selling two lenses and potentially compromising the quality?

Thanks

[K1W1]

Personally I wouldn't change what you have for any of the 18-200 lenses.
Why not buy another body and have a wide body and a telephoto body over your shoulder at any one time?

[herc182]

I didnt even think of that. Right then. I am in for a cash strapped xmas.

Could bash a D50 or D40 over my shoulder (or the D300 :))

[e_dawg]

The 18-200 is a good single-lens alternative. I have also been caught up in buying shorter-range larger aperture lenses to get better quality than my 18-200. However, during the last couple vacations, I realized that there were times that I missed some potential great shots simply because I didn't have the right focal length available at the time without swapping lenses. Of course, the moment was gone by the time I changed lenses.

I also thought I could do the 2 camera thing to mitigate that problem, but started wondering if this was going too far in the name of getting that last 5% percent in quality.

[tcadwall]

I wouldn't vote in favor of selling off two lenses for one.

The Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 would be the keeper, and you could consider selling off the 55-200mm for an upgrade to 18-200mm.

But I do like the two camera solution more personally. Some people would not want to be carrying two bodies, so they wouldn't and then they would still miss the shots. only you can decide whether you would actually carry the two bodies.

It probably would be cheaper, and obviously pretty darned flexible for the future if you did get a second body rather than sell the 55-200mm to purchase the 18-200mm.

As far as the Nikkor vs the 3rd party options. For a superzoom, the Nikkor really kills the competition in every objective review I have read. But that said, I can only speak from other's reviews that I carefully considered before purchasing my 18-200mm.

[herc182]

I think I might have to just put up with changing lenses. A second body is beyond my budget at the moment and i really like the glass I have at the moment. Its purely convenience that made me question the need.

I could alternatively just make do with my 35mm F2.0 on the camera all the time!

[DonSchap]

I use a two camera solution in my shooting, also. I do it with SONY, but effectively the method is the same.

On the A700, I have four lenses in the sling bag ... 20-35mm f/4.5-5.6, 35-70mm f/4, 90mm f/2.8 Macro, 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 (mounted), and the "grab & go" A100 with the 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 on it in the single lens bag.

I suppose when I get the 70-200mm f/2.8, I may retire the 80-400mm ... but that remains to be "seen?"

All in all, the lens don't weigh all that much, but I have it covered for almost any normal situation, except UWA. Truth is, I rarely used the UWA lens in my work. Of course, other's needs would vary.

It's not a great set up for indoor work, due to the limitation of f/4+ lensing, so using some kind of flash or brighter lighting may occasionally come up. But for just running here and there ... it works. :)

[herc182]

Holy moly that is a lot of kit DonSchap (in your signature). I am surprised you dont hire a sherpa.
Why the change to sony? Have you got a price list for your canon stuff?

The two body solution really does appeal, but that would mean another camera bag (have 3) and another credit card bill :(

[DonSchap]

Actually, I do have a back pack full of stuff, as you can well imagine. Actually two!

I could pop everything into it ... both bodies and many lenses ... and get 'er done with just the one tote.

I just like the idea of being able to grab the A100 and hit the road, if I need to. It's ready to go, anytime ... with the 18-250mm and VG-1 on it.

The A700 is also in the same state, but lacking the "vertical grip" until Novemeber, its not quite as ready. This new stuff can be a pain.

I will attach a price list to my now "excess" Canon gear listing, if you want to see it, later today. A lot of the gear can still be used by the Canon EOS-3 ... so it is not a dump off, but fair.

[Rooz]

Holy moly that is a lot of kit DonSchap (in your signature). I am surprised you dont hire a sherpa.
Why the change to sony? Have you got a price list for your canon stuff?

The two body solution really does appeal, but that would mean another camera bag (have 3) and another credit card bill :(

a d40 is cheaper than the 18-200VR and both your wide angle and tele will work on it.

[e_dawg]

What I've done recently is to use a dSLR + P&S two body solution. It's usually the 10-20 + D40 or S5 Pro and the Canon A710is P&S attached to my belt for when I need something longer than the 10-20.

When I was at the US Open, it was the D40 + 70-300/VR and the Canon A710 when I needed something shorter than 70 mm.

It's not ideal, but you'd be surprised how good the images from a P&S like the A710 can be, as it has full manual controls and can shoot in RAW mode with CHDK.