Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 18, 2011, 8:59 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 133
Default Which lenses are recommended?

Hi,

I am about to buy the D5100. There are a number of lens options.

I plan to get at least the kit 18-55 lens and a 50 mm f/1.8 lens.

For longer reach I see the 55-200 and 55-300 readily available.
My concern is that with such a wide range, will there be a compromise in image quality?
Is there somthing like a 105-200 or 105-300 which might give better images through the range?

Do people usually recommend the 55-200/300 as the way to go or are there better options?

Are the nikkor lenses preferred or the sigma or other lenses?

Thanks!
Juggernaut
Juggernaut is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 19, 2011, 7:33 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Juggernaut View Post
I plan to get at least the kit 18-55 lens and a 50 mm f/1.8 lens.

For longer reach I see the 55-200 and 55-300 readily available.
My concern is that with such a wide range, will there be a compromise in image quality?
Is there somthing like a 105-200 or 105-300 which might give better images through the range?

Do people usually recommend the 55-200/300 as the way to go or are there better options?
You can't make generalities about any lens. Yes it's true that the more a lens tries to do, the less well it will do some or all of them. But some lenses achieve their design goals better than others.

The Nikon 55-200 VR is the sharper of the two, but it has more vignetting than the Nikon 55-300 VR. The Nikon 70-300 VR is a better lens. though it is more expensive. You might also look at the Tamron 70-300 VC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Juggernaut View Post
Are the nikkor lenses preferred or the sigma or other lenses?
Again, you can't make generalities about lenses. Every manufacturer makes some gems and some duds. You need to do the research on each and every lens.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 19, 2011, 8:33 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,156
Default

Good morning,

T-Cav has pretty much summed it up regarding lenses.

I would add the following:

You may want to hold back from getting additional lenses until you've had a chance to get familiar with the camera and evaluate the different types of photography that interests you. You may find that you really like to photograph landscapes or perhaps shoot macros, as two examples, both of which require different types of lenses. If you like to shoot people and street scenes, the 50mm f1.8 will probably hold you in good stead.

Just a thought.

Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 19, 2011, 9:28 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,241
Default

I was just over at the FredMiranda site and they have a copy of the 70-300 VR for $360, shich seems about the norm. I've seen the results from many shooting this lens, and I think its an excellent option for a longer budget lens.
__________________
Greg

https://dogsportphoto.smugmug.com/
fldspringer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 19, 2011, 10:30 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,093
Default

I used to own the Nikkor 55-200 VR, and recently traded it in for a factory refurb version of the Nikkor 70-300 VR. The 55-200 is not quite as sharp as the 70-300 and of course has less reach. But, for the money, it is a really nice lens. What bothered me about it was the lens coating -- to my eye it is like the lens is wearing sun glasses. The coating tends to exaggerate color contrast, kind of like a CPL. I prefer to have the option of using a CPL or not, so that I can have that effect or choose not to. But it was not a huge negative of the lens. For sheer bang for the buck, the 55-200 VR is one of the best lens buys in the Nikkor line.

The big problem with both the 55-200 VR and the 70-300 VR is that they are just too slow. If I had all the money in the world, I would get the 70-200 VRII, which is a wonderful (though heavy) lens. The 55-200 VR is an extremely light lens and the 70-300 VR is light enough that I don't mind carrying it all day, although it is pretty much at the upper limit of that weight range. But there's just no substitute for a sharp lens with a wide aperture, and all the consumer-level teles are simply too dark. If Nikon comes out with a sharp 70-200 VR that is a constant f/4 for around $1K, I will trade my 70-300 toward the purchase of that in a heartbeat.
tclune is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:55 PM.