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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 25, 2004, 5:34 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 21
Default

First of all, I own a D70 with a AF Zoom-Nikkor 28-80mm f/3.3-5.6G. I am really satisfied with the D70's performance, however, I do feel that the lens I got with it somewhat limits the power that the D70 body holds. I like to photograph nature, as well as my Border Collie (which is a dog that moves with incredible speed). Finally, I am travelling a lot and like to photograph all kinds of things I encounter like buildings, scenery, the people on the street -- those kind of things.

As I am no millionaire, I am planning to buy one lens first, and the other one a few months later.

I am currently looking into the following lenses:
(1st buy)
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED
AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6 IF-ED
(2nd buy)
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED
AF Zoom-Nikkor 80-200mm F/2.8D ED
AF VR Zoom-Nikkor 200-400mm F/4G IF-ED

I do not have a $$$$$ budget but I also do not like to buy a cheaper lens and find out that it does not satisfy my needs and still buy the more expensive lens later on. What I hope to get, is an advice based on quality, but with the quality related on the price. So is the $900 I need to spend more on the 17-55 over the 18-70 worth it? I use my camera for home use, but are planning to do something more with it in a later stadium. So for now hobby.

Thanks for reading all of this, and I am looking forward to your advice. Also, when you own a Tamron or Sigma lens similair to the Nikkor lenses above, please share your thoughts, as I am not blindly dedicated to Nikkor.
dieseljunkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 25, 2004, 6:48 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
cameranserai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 548
Default

The problem with the lens you have isn't its inherent quality, but the lack of aperture to progress very far in the quality of the shots you take. It is a good "travelling lens" being light and portable, but you will find, as you progress, that it will limit your scope. So what can I say to help you? Well, I have the D70 with the 18/70 which at firstI detested as being plastic and low quality, so I bought the 17/55 F2.8. Now the lenses are a world apart in quality, since with F2.8 across the board you can frame and set the focal length you choose, but now, after a while, I find I carry the 18/70 "kit lens" because it is light and portable, and my perceptions as to the quality of manufacture seem to have - so far - been misplaced. It is going strong and takes good pictures, not as good as the 17/55, but good quality nevertheless.

However, there is the Sigma 18/50 F2.8digital lens out there now, and the reviews seem favourable, although no one seems to have reported on it in the forum as yet. Worth a look since it is vastly cheaper than the 17/55.

Finally, for action shots (dogs move fast and far)you need a good zoom, and I have the 70/200 F2.8 VRIFED with the TC14E converter, which lets me get in tight and getgreat shots. Expensive though, and I would recommend, on the words I have read here, the Sigma 70/200 HPO which for everybody seems to produce superb results at a fraction of the Nikon cost. The 80/200, which I have had for years, is an option but beware, if you want to use the SB800 flash, the lack of all features compared to the 70/200. The 80/400 I know nothing about but reckon with the limited aperture you would be better advised to go the 70/200 F2.8 route with the teleconverter. If you buy the Sigma you will have better pictures and cash in your pocket.

If you buy the Sigma 18/50, there will be a "hole" of 20mm between the two lenses, so since funds, as always, are limited I think you would be delighted with the 18/70 kit lens. As regards the 24/120, it isn't a wide enough angle in digital terms and doesn't give you very much that the existing lens you have can do already. You'll be overlapping to a very great extent.

In conclusion, the 18/70 plus a Sigma 70/200 F2.8 HPO and possibly a teleconverter to be purchased at a later date. Someone I am sure will disagree, but here you will cover most bases at a not too extravagant outlay.



Merry Xmas
cameranserai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 26, 2004, 7:07 AM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 21
Default

Merry christmas to you and everyone else as well! I really appreciate your feedback, and will look into it.
dieseljunkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2005, 9:13 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Ronnie948's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 721
Default

I have the 24/120 "VR" lens and it is the only lens I seem to ever use. I bought an 85 1.8 to use for Portraits but the 24/120"VR" does just as good and the 85 just sits in the camara bag unused. I would suggest getting this one first and then see if You will need any other lens.
Ronnie948 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2005, 11:29 AM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 21
Default

The problem is that I heard and read so many bad things about this lens, 24-120 VR, that I am hestitant to buy it. Although there seem to be some good samples, it is one of the most controversial and most complained about nikkors. Although the range and the VR are perfect, I am not sure wether I can deal with its limitations. I guess I need to go to a store and check it out on my camera.
dieseljunkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2005, 11:49 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 113
Default

If i remember well the problems were with the first production of that lens. If you buy it new your unit should be perfect.
Morris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2005, 12:00 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 21
Default

That is exactly what I heard. The problem is however, that no one seems to be able to confirm this. It feels like it is just random feedback. If this lens is as good as the kitlens, I might very well buy it. Then I could buy a 12-24 wide-angle lens, and finally a 70-210 VR and a 200-400 VR (for my future safari). That way, I have the entire focal range covered with minimum overlap, which is practical for travelling with 1 lens.

So, from which serial number where they improved, and does anyone have negative feedback about lens with a serial number in the new range?
dieseljunkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2005, 1:04 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 113
Default

Diesel, Read the following post:

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=66
Morris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 12, 2005, 9:24 AM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 21
Default

I guess I have to check it out somewhere. From what I understand, it is not as good as the kitlens, and still is an average lens. The only thing that changed is that after a certain serial number, the quality control got much better. That does not mean that the lens got better, and from what I read, it is an average performer.
dieseljunkie 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 7:28 PM.