• The Canon Rumors Forum has officially been shut down as of July 10, 2026.

    All data will be deleted on September 16, 2026.

    the ad free experience will return by July 17, 2026.

Replacing my 18-270

Sep 17, 2012
146
52
6,133
Just a quick question for the group mega-mind. My Tamron 18-270 (older version) bit the dust (literally, I work in the North Dakota oil patch and until they paved some key roads this summer it was like a dust storm every day). I use my 7D for newspaper work so IQ isn't the #1 priority compared to getting the photo right now, and I appreciate not having to swap lenses. So right now B&H has the Sigma 18-250 with a $200 instant rebate at $349 and the Tamron has a $70 mail in rebate at $379. I am leaning towards the Sigma because I don't think I will miss those 20 extra mm and I really don't like mail in rebates. Any thoughts one way or another on these two lenses, especially in terms of durability and weather resistance?
 
Just my 2 cents... If you're looking for durability and weather resistance, look at L lenses though you must also have a camera that's weather resistant to complete the package. The 24-105 and 17-40 L lenses are the cheapest. They would need filters though to complete the sealing. As far as I know, those lenses you mentioned are not weather resistant.
 
Upvote 0
Given that the 24-105L would give me half the flexibility at three or four times the cost, (not to mention having to carry around a 55-250 or 70-300 as well, which is what I am trying to avoid in the first place) that's pretty much a non-starter. Plus, a small town journalist, I avoid a lot of income tax by avoiding a lot of income, so cost is pretty high on my priority list for this purchase.
 
Upvote 0
In South Dakota Winter Weather, consider them throw away lenses. If they last for a year, you are lucky.

Since You would need to upgrade your body to make use of a expensive weather sealed lens, just get a cheap one and don't worry. Neither has stellar image quality at the longer focal lengths so it really doesn't matter a whole lot as far as Sigma or Tamron.
 
Upvote 0
justawriter said:
Given that the 24-105L would give me half the flexibility at three or four times the cost, (not to mention having to carry around a 55-250 or 70-300 as well, which is what I am trying to avoid in the first place) that's pretty much a non-starter. Plus, a small town journalist, I avoid a lot of income tax by avoiding a lot of income, so cost is pretty high on my priority list for this purchase.

Well, that's really a problem because you won't find weather sealing in any of the non-L lenses as far as I know. Maybe a 2nd hand lens can serve you well. In any case, rain sleeves like these seem to be a good alternative and maybe a better alternative. It can be more useful in a lot of ways.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Rain-Capes-Covers-Slickers/ci/3313/N/4075788778

For photojournalists, I think the Sigma version 18-250 will serve you well. IQ isn't so important in photo journalism as most of your print won't be big enough to notice a lot of difference in terms of IQ. It's better if you don't change lenses during your coverage.
 
Upvote 0