Lens advice for D5000

[Kenzie]

Hi guys, I need some advice for getting another lens for my new D5000. I have the standard kit lens but need something that would cover most situations. I know that there will be a lens best suited to each aspect of photography but as I am new to DSLR's I need some help!

[TCav]

What do you want to photograph?

The strength of a dSLR over other camera types is that you can get lenses that are designed for a specific purpose. The lenses that try to do a lot of things don't do many of them very well, and negate the dSLR's advantage. There are lenses that have long zoom ranges, but where their ranges overlap, they don't perform as well as the 18-55 kit lens you already have. They also are heavy and expensive, often more so than individual lenses that do a better job. And while they are dim, they also often block the flash you would need to use.

I think you'd be better off with something that would suppliment, rather than replace the lens you've already got.

[tclune]

You might find it useful to read this beginner's buying guide to dSLR lenses: http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Guid...g_guide_01.htm

FWIW

[Kenzie]

So what do you guys think of these two?

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/...6332/show.html

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/...3537/show.html

[shoturtle]

They are the best of the bottom of the barrel. Both are about the same, but the edge go slightly to the tamron. Both are a bit soft on at the long end of the zoom, and not having image stab may reduce the numbers of keep at the 250-300mm range. But you get a decent close up lens, not true macro. But they do a good job on flowers and such.

[TCav]

Among Sigma's low-end telephoto zooms, the one you've linked to isn't as good as Sigma's APO. And the APO isn't as good as the Tamron 70-300 Di LD that you've linked to. The Tamron isn't great, but if you want something better, it will cost you a lot more.

[Kenzie]

Would this be a better buy then?

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/...9832/show.html

[shoturtle]

the nikon lens is a good entry level tele, but depending on what you need 200mm my be a bit short.

[TCav]

The Nikon has a lot more distortion and vignetting. The Tamron is sharper stopped down, but the Nikon is sharper wide open, but that's where the Nikon vignettes a lot. The Tamron is longer and it has the 1:2 macro mode, so I'd still go with the Tamron. There isn't anything better in the price range.

See:
Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED AF-S DX Nikkor (Tested)
Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD Macro 1:2 AF (Tested)

[tclune]

Originally Posted by Kenzie

Would this be a better buy then?

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/...9832/show.html

No, the Nikon to consider would be the VR, which is only a bit more expensive. In choosing between the Nikon and Tamron here, the choice is between the Nikon with image stablilization and the Tamron with Macro and a bit longer reach. For me (I have the Nikon 55-200mm VR), it is valuable that Nikon lenses have built-in support in Capture NX2. Vignetting and distortion are auto-corrected for all Nikon lenses in that application, so I don't pay much attention to these things in the unprocessed image. The big problem for both lenses is that they are quite slow. Just like you can't fix stupid, you can't fix slow. FWIW

--Tom Clune