snubbr.com

But what about lenses?
A recurring advice here seems to be to spend less on the camera and more on the lens. Having realized that is probably a good advice, I have decided to go for either a Nikon D40x or a Canon 400D (rather than a D80/40D which was my original intention)..

Now, which lens should I by?.

Remembering the days with my Nikon FE and the constant change of lenses, I've decided to go for one single lens rather than several different, and I figure I will need something like a 18-200 or perhaps a 28-300 lens..

But what about all those other features, like VR, OI, and so forth? And what about the different brands, should I go with the original lenses, or should I by a Sigma or perhaps a Tamron?.

Oh, all these questions. I really hope you could shed some light on these issues..

Altogether, I've got around 1000-1200 US$ to spend, for camera and lens (and perhaps a flash as well?). And I will do most of my shooting outdoors...

Comments (7)

I have direct experience only of Nikon fit lenses but I read a lot..

IS, NR & VR are the same - image stabilisation.

The Nikon 18-200 is almost unique in providing good resolution throughout it 12x range AND VR. I would not touch it's only competitor - the Sigma 18-200 OS - without a reliable review of the Nikon version (Sigma lenses tend to be either very good or awful with very little in between. The Canon review below is worrying). The Sigma is also f/6.3 at the long end compared with f/5.6 on the Nikon..

The Tamron 18-250 f/3.5-6.3 gets good reviews BUT does not have VR. That will give you problems at the telephoto end without at least a monopod or shutter speed of 1/400th (if you can see what you are shooting in the viewfinder)..

Canon has no 12x zoom equivalent. So you would have to go with the Tamron or Sigma (or change your strategy). There is a review of the Sigma on a Canon here:.

Http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_18200_3563os/index.htm.

I would not touch it on the basis of that review..

The Tamron is reviewed here:.

Http://www.photozone.de/.../8Reviews/lenses/tamron_18250_3563_canon/index.htm.

A very good review - but NO IS!!.

So working things backwards if you truly want one lens then the Nikon 18-200 VR is the only one that can truly be recommended which then decides the camera body for you..

Do go and try the 18-200 on the D40x. Some people regard it as a bit heavy. But do also try the 18-135 kit lens - No VR but it is less necessary at 135mm. It may be all you need..

I endorse your strategy not to be endlessly changing lens which is why I would not want 18-55 plus 55-200 kit lenses. 18-70 is so much better and 18-135 better still (and 18-200 brilliant). But what do you NEED. If you can get that in one lens and then have just one other that you put on occasionally that is fine (especially if you dont carry the 2nd lens around most of the time)..

What are your photographic needs? Do you a need a good low light lens to stop action photos of children/grandchildren? If so an f/2.8 lens is worth considering. Do you occasionally want to shoot wildlife in which case a 70-300 VR would be a good 2nd lens..

On the basis of the information you give the Nikon 18-200 VR sounds like the lens for you but do think around it. All lenses are compromises..

There are lots of reviews at:.

Http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html.

And.

Http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showcat.php/cat/2.

Chris Elliott.

*Nikon* D Eighty + Fifty - Other equipment in Profile.

Http://PlacidoD.Zenfolio.com/..

Comment #1

Thanks for a impressively detailed answer..

Having read your advices and checked a few cameras in real life, I think I'm gonna stick with a Nikon D80 / 18-135. Not the least since that combination is currently being offered at a quite decent price here in Sweden..

Anyway, thanks, you're answer was indeed helpful...

Comment #2

My pleasure! Enjoy your new camera when you get it!.

Chris Elliott.

*Nikon* D Eighty + Fifty - Other equipment in Profile.

Http://PlacidoD.Zenfolio.com/..

Comment #3

I'm getting the Nikon D80 / 18-135 here in Sweden for Christmas too >_>. Very much looking forward to it!..

Comment #4

Marcusohlstrom wrote:.

A recurring advice here seems to be to spend less on the camera andmore on the lens. Having realized that is probably a good advice, Ihave decided to go for either a Nikon D40x or a Canon 400D (ratherthan a D80/40D which was my original intention)..

The advice generally refers to pursuit of better optical quality, not other lens features, which might or might not be useful depending on what you shoot, how big you enlarage, etc..

Now, which lens should I by?.

Remembering the days with my Nikon FE and the constant change oflenses, I've decided to go for one single lens rather than severaldifferent, and I figure I will need something like a 18-200 orperhaps a 28-300 lens..

Keep in mind such lenses trade off optical quality for versatility of focal length, but you won't see much difference if you don't have output larger than say, 8x10 inches. Just don't expect optical performance equal to pro lenses when shot wide-open. It can help to stop down the lens 2 stops from max (I usually shoot in aperture priority mode or manual so I set f/5.6 or f/8 and vary the shutter speed) and you'll do pretty well..

But what about all those other features, like VR, OI, and so forth?.

If image quality in big enlargements is not your top concern, then IS/OS/VR/whatever might be somewhat helpful if you know that you will rarely carry/use a tripod..

And what about the different brands, should I go with the originallenses, or should I by a Sigma or perhaps a Tamron?.

The major lens makers all make some nice lenses and also they make some mediocre lenses. You can't generalize, in my expierience, to say that models of a brand are bad or good. I've had two great Sigma lenses (great for the purposes they were designed for) and one mediocre Sigma lens. Most of my Canon lenses have been great, too, but my old 100-300mm USM was wretched when zoomed out to 300mm (and it was my longest focal length at the time; I bought it wanting 300mm focal length before my ambitions and standards of image quality were very high)..

Oh, all these questions. I really hope you could shed some light onthese issues..

If you don't enlarge beyond 8x10 inches or so without any cropping, then you won't see much image quality difference between lenses..

If you are serious about maximum image quality when enlarged/cropped to large sized output, then don't worry about seeking extra features. Either the best lens for your purposes and budget will have those features or not. It's not like buying a car where you can choose custom options. Though not perfect, lens tests such as those at http://photodo.com or http://photozone.de/ can help your evaluation of specific lenses..

Altogether, I've got around 1000-1200 US$ to spend, for camera andlens (and perhaps a flash as well?). And I will do most of myshooting outdoors..

None of the "all in one" lenses such as Sigma 18-200 or Nikon 18-200 or Tamron 28-300 are going to give great results for critical work; they compromise image quality for versatility of focal length range. But in addition to my top of the line Canon "L" lenses, I also use a Sigma all-in-one lens sometimes for casual snapshots that I don't expect to enlarge much..

Galleries: http://www.dheller.net.

Many folks on dpreview.com list their equipment here, but don't list any links to their images. Do they collect equipment? Or take pictures?..

Comment #5

I think the D80 or Canon is a better choice, not being able to use lenses other than AFS type on the D40/40x kills it for me, maybe you will always be happy with the 18-135 but someday if you want some thing "special" you are stuck spending big money on Nikons fast AFS lenses, with the 80 both the 50mm ($100) and 85mm 1.8's ($350-$ 400)are there and they both out perform my $$$$$ 70-200 in there range .

The 50 and 85 are just to good to not have the option.

RegardsRay.

Marcusohlstrom wrote:.

Thanks for a impressively detailed answer..

Having read your advices and checked a few cameras in real life, Ithink I'm gonna stick with a Nikon D80 / 18-135. Not the least sincethat combination is currently being offered at a quite decent pricehere in Sweden..

Anyway, thanks, you're answer was indeed helpful..

Http://www.pbase.com/ray645..

Comment #6

I've owned Sigma lenses before and I was not impressed..

I'm in love with my 18-200mm Nikkor though. I absolutely LOVE IT!.

It's not nearly as sharp as say a 17-55, but as a one lens solution it is fantastic...

Comment #7

Click Here to View All...

Sponsored Amazon Deals:

1. Get big savings on Amazon warehouse deals.
2. Save up to 70% on Amazon Products.


This question was taken from a support group/message board and re-posted here so others can learn from it.

 

Categories: Home | Diet & Weight Management | Vitamins & Supplements | Herbs & Cleansing |

Sexual Health | Medifast Support | Nutrisystem Support | Medifast Questions |

Web Hosting | Web Hosts | Website Hosting | Hosting |

Web Hosting | GoDaddy | Digital Cameras | Best WebHosts |

Web Hosting FAQ | Web Hosts FAQ | Hosting FAQ | Hosting Group |

Hosting Questions | Camera Tips | Best Cameras To Buy | Best Cameras This Year |

Camera Q-A | Digital Cameras Q-A | Camera Forum | Nov 2010 - Cameras |

Oct 2010 - Cameras | Oct 2010 - DSLRs | Oct 2010 - Camera Tips | Sep 2010 - Cameras |

Sep 2010 - DSLRS | Sep 2010 - Camera Tips | Aug 2010 - Cameras | Aug 2010 - DSLR Tips |

Aug 2010 - Camera Tips | July 2010 - Cameras | July 2010 - Nikon Cameras | July 2010 - Canon Cameras |

July 2010 - Pentax Cameras | Medifast Recipes | Medifast Recipes Tips | Medifast Recipes Strategies |

Medifast Recipes Experiences | Medifast Recipes Group | Medifast Recipes Forum | Medifast Support Strategies |

Medifast Support Experiences |

 

(C) Copyright 2010 All rights reserved.