| Moderated by: chrisbet, | Page: 1 2 3 4   |
|
|||||||
| Lens buying advice needed - Page 1 | |
Rating: 
|
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Mon Dec 2nd, 2013 08:44 |
|
1st Post |
Judith
|
So... I've got myself a nice shiny new job with a nice shiny salary and am thinking that it's high time I treated myself to a decent lens or two or three for my D200.  I want a camera as well but Nikon are being very unobliging in that department as I want a D400. I can sit it out a while longer on the camera. Might be forced to buy a D600 but I don't really want to go full frame.  Anyway, I currently have a cheapo nikon 35-80mm that I got for 30 quid on ebay a couple of years ago. It's actually not as bad as it sounds but not brilliant either so what would you recommend in that range? Budget of few hundred pounds-ish. Other lens I have is an oldish nikon 28-200mm. Again not bad, but not brilliant I was thinking on a 55-200mm which seems to get good reviews. Any other suggestions?
|
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Mon Dec 2nd, 2013 11:55 |
|
2nd Post |
jk
|
There is the superb but heavy 80-200 f2.8 AFD or the 70-200 f2.8 AFS VRii but these are targeted at FX use and are expensive £1500. Then there is the 70-300 f4.5-5.6 AFS VR (£400) this costs very little and is razor sharp. It works on both FX and DX camera but is very light compared to other FX lenses. Dont worry about the f4.5 as modern camera with high ISO gets round this. I recommended this lens to Eric and I think he looked at it and got one as well. The 55-200 you mention is f4.5-5.6 as well and has VR but I would go for the 70-300 as it is better for a little extra in price. I would also say that if you want an interim D200 replacement would be a D300 or D300S would be had for £400ish.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Mon Dec 2nd, 2013 12:15 |
|
3rd Post |
Eric
|
Judith wrote:So... I've got myself a nice shiny new job with a nice shiny salary and am thinking that it's high time I treated myself to a decent lens or two or three for my D200. Where is the job Judith...Spain or Scotland? And can we ask what you are doing on dry land? I would ask yourself.... 1. What proportion of my shots are at 28-35, 35-80, 80-200? 2. Which additional range would I most need ...wider or longer? I have both the DX 55-200 and the FX 70-300 (105-450) ....not strictly true. I lent my 70-300 to a friend and haven't seen it for 2months. LOL He thinks it's the dogs doodahs. Interestingly, looking at some shots the other day I was surprised to discover some of the best shots were at 200mm...on the 55-200. That's not to say it necessarily any better (may have been a good day for me!) but it confirms they are both more than capable. It's just the 55-200 is a shorter range and would be limited to DX bodies. Not looking at prices, I might be inclined to get both the 18-105 and the 70-300....to give you a complete spread 18-450.
____________________ Eric |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Mon Dec 2nd, 2013 15:39 |
|
4th Post |
Judith
|
Now, JK, you know how I feel about weightlifting!!! If I wasn't so pathetically weak in the arm dept, I would buy myself a D800 but I'm just not prepared to go to the gym often enough to be able to use it!! So, that also rules out silly, heavy lenses as well. And, as for the high iso capabilities of the D200... And, no, I'm not buying your D300!! lol  Eric, I'm on dry land but surrounded by water in Shetland. Am working as a technical clerk at on the construction site of the new gas plant they are building there. I even have my very own hard hat!  Hard work, long hours and 5.00am rises but at last I'm seeing some of that nice money stuff in the bank.So, back to lenses. Well, Shetland has thrown a spanner in the works of my usual photography which makes that 70-300 quite attractive as there is a lot of scope for nature photography between bird colonies, otters and killer whales. There's even a company taking you on photography jaunts to the best spots for piccies which I might try out next summer. I wouldn't normally have bothered about getting to 300mm but the lure of cute little otters is making it attractive. Long lens aside, I want something that will be decent enough for portraits as well as general photography so the 18-105 might be ok for that. Hmmmm...
|
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Mon Dec 2nd, 2013 15:46 |
|
5th Post |
jk
|
No chance of getting my D300 it is my underwater macro camera along with a D90 for my wide-angle underwater shots. D300s units are going on ebay at good prices, cheaper than repairing the D200 and you get video if you want. I wouldnt suggest a D300 unless you definitely rule out video.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Mon Dec 2nd, 2013 16:21 |
|
6th Post |
Judith
|
Some of the wildlife around here... http://www.shetlandnature.net/
|
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Mon Dec 2nd, 2013 16:42 |
|
7th Post |
Eric
|
Judith wrote:Now, JK, you know how I feel about weightlifting!!! If I wasn't so pathetically weak in the arm dept, I would buy myself a D800 but I'm just not prepared to go to the gym often enough to be able to use it!! So, that also rules out silly, heavy lenses as well. And, as for the high iso capabilities of the D200... And, no, I'm not buying your D300!! lol The 70-300 would still work for portraits as well...being = 105 at the short end. Traditionally the 135mm was favoured by many portrait shooters. You may have to stand back on Orkney for group shots though. 
____________________ Eric |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Tue Dec 3rd, 2013 02:34 |
|
8th Post |
jk
|
If you want a little extra reach with the camera then of course there are the 80-400 f4.5-5.6 as well but this is a larger and heavier lens. Comes in Nikon (two models) and Sigma variants. The Sigma I have performs very nicely but not as good as my Nikon 400mm f2.8 Go to Ffordes in Inverness before you buy!
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Tue Dec 3rd, 2013 06:49 |
|
9th Post |
Judith
|
Yes, but you need a bloody crane to lift the 400mm f2.8!! lol I shall have a look. I'm never in Inverness but there's a place called Calumet in Edinburgh. Eric, you exaggerate - Orkney is way further away than 300mm!
|
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Tue Dec 3rd, 2013 08:02 |
|
10th Post |
Iain
|
I would recommend the 70-300mm vr as well Judith, it's light but very capable. I wish I was up there, it's a place I've always wanted to visit for the wildlife.
|
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| This is topic ID = 786 Current time is 12:38 | Page: 1 2 3 4 | |
| Nikon DSLR Forums > Camera and Lens Forums > Lenses > Lens buying advice needed | Top | |
Users viewing this topic |
||
Current theme is Modern editor
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk Thank you. |
Hosted by Octarine Services
UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0611 seconds (67% database + 33% PHP). 83 queries executed.
UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0611 seconds (67% database + 33% PHP). 83 queries executed.