Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 24, 2010, 9:55 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 87
Default Large zoom lenses

Hi,

After studing here and having a help from many members (thanks!) I decided to buy a dSLR. But I want a dSLR with a very large zoom range. So I'd like to have some opinions about these lenses in the 18-200mm (OR MORE) range...

The camera model is not defined, but there is a big chance to be a Nikon APS-C. So some lenses I found are:

- Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di-II Macro Lens for Nikon Digital SLR (US$ 290.00)
- Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 II DC Lens for Nikon Digital SLR (US$ 390.00)
- Sigma Zoom Super Wide Angle 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS (Optical Stabilizer) HSM Lens for Nikon Digital SLR (US$ 400.00)
- Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II Zoom Lens (US$ 765.00)
- Tamron 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 Di-II LD Asph. IF Macro Autofocus Lens for Nikon Digital SLR (US$ 470.00)
- Sigma 18 -250mm f/3.5 - 6.3 DC OS HSM Autofocus Zoom Lens For Nikon Cameras (US$ 530.00)
- Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di-II VC LD Asph. Macro Lens (US$ 600.00)

Points to debate could be:

- Is OS (Optical Stabilization) / VC (Vibration Compensation) / VR (Vibration Reduction) a feature that makes really difference?
- Are Tamron and Sigma much worse than original Nikon lenses?
- Are these long zoom lenses the same in the lower range (18-55mm) than a ONLY 18-55mm lens? Or they perform worse even in wider zoom range?

Thanks and regards!

Last edited by MarceloRSC; Feb 24, 2010 at 10:57 PM.
MarceloRSC is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 24, 2010, 10:11 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
pbjunkiee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Pensacola Fl
Posts: 914
Default

what are your funds
would make a huge difference.
pbjunkiee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2010, 10:19 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Decatur, GA
Posts: 2,053
Default

also are we taking a Nikon camera for sure or could it be a Canon camera etc

dave
Photo 5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2010, 10:25 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

It would really help depending on the body, as there may be better options.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2010, 10:33 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Well if you go with a nikon, and want to shoot low light form your other thread, I would go with a stabilized lens. As 3.5 may not allow a fast enough shutter speed to avoid camera shake when hand helded. And IS may save the shot.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2010, 10:51 PM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 87
Default

So the Image Stabilization is REALLY functional? Deserves the price difference?

Is there any significant difference between the flavors, like Sigma OS (Optical Stabilization) / Tamron VC (Vibration Compensation) / Nikon VR (Vibration Reduction)? And the built in stabilization like Pentax K-X?
MarceloRSC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2010, 11:00 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

In low light hand held, it makes a big difference. Especially with a darker lens. It could mean a 2/3 to a full F stop of performance.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2010, 11:01 PM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 87
Default

Pbjunkiee, there is not a goal, but if I'm talking about a camera between D5000 and D90 (or just a few higher), between USD 600 - 800, I think that the goal to the lens should be the price of the camera...

I know the prices of those listed (goes from USD 300 until USD 765) - I'll edit and include them in the list above. The questions above are exactly to know if the higher prices are valid: is Nikon as better to cost double? is VR so good to justify USD 100 more?
MarceloRSC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2010, 11:03 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
pbjunkiee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Pensacola Fl
Posts: 914
Default

my vote would be a d90, and a sigma 70-200 2.8, really safe combo

and in this case you really get what you pay for, but i would go sigma in this case.

Last edited by pbjunkiee; Feb 24, 2010 at 11:07 PM.
pbjunkiee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2010, 11:03 PM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 87
Default

Shoturtle, I'm becoming convinced about this feature. So the options becomes the Sigma 18-200, Sigma 18-250, Tamron 18-270 and Nikon 18-200...
MarceloRSC 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 9:21 AM.