Lens advice!

[hoodmeister]

Right o'
first off, I best explain what I already have :
Nikon D70
Nikkor 28-80 3.3-5.6 G
Sigma 50 2.8 DG Macro D

Now, what i'm after is something wider than 28, and something more telescopic than 80.
I'd also [ideally] like that all in one lens. For the moment, at least, I'm not fond of swapping lenses a lot. When I go out shooting "proper" I'll take both my lenses, but even that is (I find) a right PITA & i'm always cautious about damaging the lens not mounted on my cam (as it sits on my belt, not ideal)

soooo, what i'm looking for is something which goes from 18 all the way to something more telescopic than 80. I say 18 as I reckon that's suitably wide for what I want it for (groups of people / landscapes) and below 18 seems to get very expensive, and not have much zoom range to it. On top of which I may get a super wide angle lens at a later date.

I've been looking at the Sigma 18-200 (Or possibly the Tamron 18-200) and I have to say it really appeals. It's not the sharpest of lenses, but then again I have the 50mm for when I need something sharper (at least in the middling range). Another possibility is the Sigma 18-125, which appeals as it costs less... And i'm not wholly sure how much i'll use the more telescopic end.

I'm also eager to not be spending much more than £200. Yes, the Nikon 18-200 w/ VR will undoubtedly piss all over any of the above lenses, but it'll also piss all over my bank account.

So yes, that's vaguely what i'm looking at for the moment, but i'm still very much open to suggestions.

[menthel]

I am no expert but I think you may well be told that 2 lenses will be the best idea. Then again, wait for the experts!

[hoodmeister]

Yes, I think that would be the generaly accepted "best idea"...

However, finding something of decent optical quality (something to surpass the Sigma / Tamron) in this sort of price bracket on both a wide angle zoom & a telescopic one may, I beleive, be quite a challenge... And that doesn't even take into consideration the versatility of such a wide zoom range as a "kit" lens offers.

[da_ging]

if it's just for a general purpose walk about lens id say get either the sigma 18-125 or 18-200, though the nikon vr 18-200 @ £490 i think is a bargain assuming its optics are upto scratch

i mean sure you could get better quality by going for 2 lenses but tbh back in the real world a single, convenient and light all in 1 lens is the more practical cost effective option

ot, i really must sell these pro scanners i've got sat here so i can buy myself a d50, need something else to do besides play bf2 all day lol

[Funkstar]

hoodmeister,

I've got the same problem with my 350D. I'd like to ditch the two kit lenses i got with it and get either of the 18-200s. I know you can probably buy better lenses than these, but they are still probably better than the two i have. And lighter and more convenient to boot.

I have £50 or Jessops vouchers lying at home, tempted to go shopping at the weekend

[chrestomanci]

As others have said, getting two lenses will be much better than one. Basically when they make a lens with a very large zoom ratio, such as an 18-200, they have to compromise a lot in the design. The maximum aperture will be quite small, there will be optical aberrations, and as no pro would choose such a lens, you won't get pro features like aspherical elements, VR, or the like.

If for some reason, you can only carry one lens (perhaps you are traveling light, and can't carry the extra bulk or weight), then a long zoom would be the best compromise. Otherwise go for two lenses.

For the telephoto lens, Nikon produce two decent consumer grade 70-300mm zoom lenses, One costing about 120 ukp, and a better one with ED and aspherical elements for about 300. Both are available from ebay traders for about half that. (here and here)

For the wide angle, a good option would be to trade in your 28-80 lens, for the 18-70 Nikor that normally comes with the d70 as a kit lens. It is a very good lens for the money, and I am surprised you don’t have it. If you want to go any wider than that then things will get very expensive, (Nikon’s 12-24 wide-angle zoom retails for 900 ukp, or about 500 on ebay).

Another option though would be to buy a Peleng 8mm fisheye. The images it produces have classic fisheye distortion, and as it does not support auto exposure (let alone AF) it is a little tricky to use, but for around 110 ukp from ebay nothing can go wider for even 10 times the price. You can get free software that will un-disort fisheye distortion, allowing you to get very wide rectalinear photographs from a fisheye lens.

[DR]

I have just been playing with one of these: Tamron SP AF28-75/2.8 XR Di LD


http://www.photo.net/equipment/tamron/28_75_Di/

Very impressed...

[hoodmeister]

Looks like a nice lens, David... But it is both out of my price range, and is neither wider or more telescopic than what I already have

Based on what's been said here, i'm now considering a slightly different approach... Discontinued second hand lenses.

A prime for wide angle (Tokina AT-X 17 Pro)
And a reasonable zoom for telescopic ( Nikkor 70-210, not "D" )

Both of these lenses seems to have quite a lot of praise, and although it wouldn't give me the all in one walkabout zoom i'm after, it does look like it'll give me some nice glass covering a good range for relatively little money... The Tokina is also pretty compact.

Having troubles finding any kind of sample shots on a crop dSLR for either of those lesnes, though...

[noah]

here's a good review of the nikon 70-210, the first one is of the non D version.

and another for the tokina, all the review are positive, so why not.

id go and try the sigma 70-300 APO DG (the newest one) too, its about £170 and its a very good lens that is nice and sharp at around f8, however as with many sigma lenses the quality control can be a bit iffy and they're worth trying first. ive had one for a few months and use it frequently and im very happy with it - must have got a goodun i think.

if you want to take a chance then the prices at onestop digital are amazing, but changin 'soft' lenses from HK may be tricky.

[hoodmeister]

Not received it yet, but just picked up the Nikkor 70-210 (Not D) for £70... Bargain! (Hopefully )

I'm having trouble sourcing the 17mm Tokina... Think it's discontinued. Only places I can find it are too pricey :/

Which leaves me in an awkward position... What i'm basically looking for is a lens around the 18mm sort of range, doesn't matter whether it's prime or not, that is pretty sharp, and can be had for relatively little money (second hand is fine)...

Vaguely considered the Tokina 12-24, but decided it was far too expensive, really... So any other recommendations? Any of the very "standard" 18-x (18-35, 18-50 etc..) lenses that i've seen fare particularly well at the wide end?

[Flibb]

Theres a review or 2 HERE
The Nikon AF-S DX 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G is seen as being a good lens, sorts the wide bit out, you could shove a teleconvertor on it to get the telephoto end.

linky to compatability chart

Have seen some great photos with these used to on 300/400mm lenses.

[Flibb]

ALso I have a sigma 70-300 apo, picked it up for around £50 on ebay, very happy. Has bad points like slow AF, but with patience gets good photos.

[divinemadness]

Originally Posted by Flibb

ALso I have a sigma 70-300 apo, picked it up for around £50 on ebay, very happy. Has bad points like slow AF, but with patience gets good photos.

£50 is pretty good for the APO - I paid £140 new for mine, and I'm pretty happy with it for that. It's not great over 200mm but then nothing at these prices will be.

[hoodmeister]

Thanks for the advice chaps, but (unless the lens turns out to be a duff) the need for a telescopic is no more... As I mentioned above, I picked up a Nikkor 70-210 f4-5.6 today, so now i'm just in the market for a (relatively) wide angle. Circa 18mm

[noah]

Originally Posted by divinemadness

£50 is pretty good for the APO - I paid £140 new for mine, and I'm pretty happy with it for that. It's not great over 200mm but then nothing at these prices will be.

mine pretty darn sharp at 300mm, jsut remember to stop oit down to about f8 and you should see a good improvement. also there is an older version of the apo, the new one is the DG super II i think and its optically far superior apparently, you can tell which one it is as the finish is matte and slightly textured with a red ring near the end of the lens. you probebly still got a good price at £140 for the new one, i wouldnt worry about it

and have a look at the 18-70 ed hoodi, £200 is about right for it if you can stretch.

www.ffordes.com have a few examples

[shiato storm]

here's two of my earth pennies...

i'm no nikon buff but I do know that the 18-70 (d70 kit lens) is a very good quality lens. unfortunately if you're after a zoom range, as has been stated, you end up compremisin gon quality due to the range the lenses have to cover. I believe the maximum zoom range manufacturers tend to stay with in is 3x, this means optical quality can be controlled more accurately and there's less chance of CA and all that fuzz at the wider ends. so 24-70 is a fairly standard range, as is 70-200. get to 18-200 and yes, quality will not be high as others BUT there is something many/most dSLR users forget...
the sensor in a dSLR (unless you're loaded and bought a canon 1ds/1d mkII or 5D) is smaller than the 35mm frame - as a result the sensor takes its image from the central region of the lens. manufacturers have difficulty maintaining image quality towards the edges of their lenses but the centres are almost aways consistent. as a result dSLRs - despite no using the entire lens itself do use [what I like to call] the sweet spot in the centre. this means that a dSLR user can achieve excellent results on most lenses - ok so some are utter dogs but sigma/tamron are up at the top of the chain so well worth a look. I know of some people who have some nice L lenses but leave them at home in favour of a sigma/tamron 18-200 lens... the range is good and whilst now 'pro', if you shoot in raw you can recover huge amounts of sharpness (16bit files tolerate sharpening far greater than your average 8bit jpeg).

another thing I feel is worth mentioning is get the best lens you can afford. no point getting a dog of a lens cause you'll not use it and its money wasted that could have been used for better. so don't skimp out - unless you find an insanely good deal - thats different