Why a superzoom lens DOESN'T makes sense

Pixel Photography just posted a blog post titled Why a Superzoom Lens Makes Sense. There's plenty of good arguments there, but there's also plenty of good reasons not to choose a superzoom lens. 

Image: Flickr/jdanvers

Lens quality
Sure, a superzoom lens means less to carry around. On a daily basis I carry my Nikon D700, a Sigma 50mm f/1.4, a Nikon 105mm f/2.8G VR Micro and a Nikon 20mm f/2.8D. If I could get these different lenses in one lens, and get the quality I want, nothing would be better.
One of the reasons for buying a dSLR, is that you can get the lenses that perfectly suits you needs. Check out my post "Do I need a digital SLR?". People buy a dSLR because they want something better than their compact camera, and by putting on a superzoom they're only halfway there. If you want to carry as little as possible, buy a Canon PowerShot S90 instead. It's a decent camera.

Zooming makes you lazy
The best tip you can give a new photographer, is move in closer! Take out your camera, and get in peoples faces. I know it's difficult in the beginning, but just get used to it.
And how often does one need  the zoom-range above 50mm (real-life about 75mm-80mm)? Sure enough, a few times during the vacation to Rome, but usually most people use the 18mm-50mm range (I'm partly guessing here).

Low light shooting and depth of field
The superzoom lenses have poorer low-light capabilities than a standard zoom lens. Having a Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 instead of a Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 makes a huge difference when shooting indoor.
Many of the superzoom lenses have image stabilizers, and it helps in low-light shooting. But with a larger aperture, it's easier to get that blurred out background that we all love.

Price vs. performance
The Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 is $419. The Sigma 18-200mm is $400. Both of these lenses are good representatives of the different types of lenses we're talking about here.
On of the best superzoom lenses out there, Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S ED VR II, will put you back more than $700. It's good, but it's still just a superzoom lens.
I think most amateur photographers don't need the superzoom lenses,  and that they'll appreciate quality over quantity.


Disclosure: I'm employed by FotoVideo Norway, which is the main distributor of Sigma in Norway. My use of Sigma lenses as examples in this post is just examples of different types of lenses, and  not a way of pushing Sigma on everyone here.