Lens advice: what should be my second lens??
160270
I'm not a G series owner "yet", but I think there are very few real choices for lenses. The 45-200 is the most likely choice for telephoto. And the 20mm/f1.7 "pancake" for indoors/low light. I'd think the lense you have is probably the better overall for average use, especially if the EZ zoom feature works as well as in the FZ series. I would think you could reach @150mm at 5EZ. The EZ zoom feature is supposed to be able to double the focal length, bringing the 14-45 (28-90) to 28-90 (56-180). And it is "free". Unless you need the long reach of the 45-200mm (90-400mm), which I can't do without, why spend the money?
350251
One more thing, unless you have excellent light collection, I'd be careful. Both of these lenses absorb some light, and at maximum magnification the image may be too dark.
784054
I personally would go with the 18-105mm. It is more "flexible." Hope this helps.
1134881
I only really used one lens and that was ok. never checked the others. but I will now. sorry I didn't have the answer.
1272575
I have both the Tamron 17-50 and the 28-75 as well as the Tamron 28-300 that I shoot with the Nikon D200. I can't say if I prefer the 17-50 over 28-75 but I love both of them and find I use them both depending on what I'm shooting. If I could afford only 1 lens it would probably be the 28-75 for my type of shooting. If you;'e shooting large groups of people or need the wider angle then I'm sure 17-50 may serve you better.
1601331
My husband suggested contacting the manufacturer to see if you can buy just the lens you need. Good luck!
1289976
What lenses do you own now and what's your budget? Are you asking for a longer telephoto lens or a single-lens-solution that covers a bigger range?
2252858
It's probably a matter of personal preference, however, it was my preference not to change lenses while 'out and about' and I could avoid carry a second lens. The 18-200 lens is obviously heavier that either of the smaller lenses, but it works so beautifully that after I got it, I seldom used the other 2.
1436215
A barlow is fine. I use the GSO Barlow that actually gives you two magnification choices... http://agenaastro.com/gso-1-25-2x-achromatic-barlow-lens.html
1003045
I'd suggest you use what you have before getting additional gear! I own this lens and I have not needed any ring flash. the Canon flash/lineup set low would all suffice. Or even a light reflector would work as well. As my grandmother would say" Finish what you have on your plate first, before adding something else,!
855771
The lens you have would be perfect for the family portrait. I use my 35mm for most of my work.
873452
Another option is getting the 50mm 1.8 for about a hundred bucks. Takes great shots and you can still buy the 28-135. I bought my 28-135 used and love having both lenses.
1232658
To me, both are equally good. If you already have the body I'd go with more Sony lens versus buying a second body
724505
Hey Barbara, I would definitely try one a little sturdier. I have this one now on a lighter Nikon (D7000) and primarily use a smaller lens (18-105) and I think it is about at capacity and maybe a little under-qualified. Just one man's opinion but I think something more robust would suit your very nice set up better.
1549359
I would go with a more versatile lens for low light performances. Maybe a 70-200 or something similar.
1945194
I had a Canon 70-300 lens for about twenty years and continued to use it when I bought my new Rebel t1i. A year or so I fropped it and replaced with a digital one of the same focal length. Both these lenses have served me very well, as an amateur photographer. Excellent choice. A couple years ago i bought a 2x converter and have used it a surprising number of times. I like the results with that on, too.
1825170
I agree with the previous comment. The Tamron lens is a good 'general' lens for your bag. The kit lens is worthless in my opinion and should be avoided at all cost. Your 50mm 1.4 is my recommendation.