New lens choices.....

[misskitty123]

I've had my D5000 for about a year now and love it but I'm starting to think about another lens. I have the kit 18-55, 55-200 and 35 mm.

 

I want something that covers more than the distance that the 18-55 does so that I don't have to switch lenses quite as often when traveling. I don't mind carrying the other two lenses around but would like a good "walk around lens" that might save me from missing a shot, if I don't have enough time to switch lenses.

 

I'm looking at the 18-200 or 16-85....I know that with the 18-200 I might lose some image quality at the further distances. If you were me, which would you pick?

[dodger501]

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/277219-USA/Nikon_2145_Zoom_Wide_Angle_Telephoto_AF.html

[bionicman97]

I'm also thinking about a 18-200. I figure, even if I loose some quality at the further distance, it's better than not being able to take the picture because I didn't have a lens/could't change it fast enough.

[chipmaster]

You actually have the perfect kit with two light weight but very good value consumer zooms then the great fast prime for lowlight.

 

If you really want the big P&S one soluation then yes the 18-200 Nikkor is the do all. This lense is a love or hate relationship with most people. I'm in the former camp. I had both these lenses and the 16-85 and 18-200 when I shot DX.

 

The 16-85 is pricey for the range it gives you but it is of the 5 consumer lenses the best in quality by a hair. The extra 2mm on the wide side may not seem like a lot but if you shoot a lot indoors you will find that 2mm is very valuable. The downside beside the price is the very limited zoom on the long end only to 85.

 

I found that I used the 18-200 90% of the time. Having the extra range on the long side built in was just too tempting not to always have it on my D300. Just be aware that except near infinity is it truely a 200mm and yes on the long end its a bit soft, but for even 8x10 blow ups more then good enough.

 

 

A lense you don't mention that you might consider that is cheaper but just in between is the 18-105 nikkor. You can find it ofte for saile on craigs list as it is the kit lense that came with the D90 and lots of those people often flip the lense as they use other lenses. I shoot that as my primiary lense on my D5000 and feel no need for anything much wider or longer. The only beef I have with it is it like the 55-200 has a plastic mount.

 

Here is a good read from Thom: http://www.bythom.com/nikon-dx-lens-summary.htm

 

Good luck,

 

I've had my D5000 for about a year now and love it but I'm starting to think about another lens. I have the kit 18-55, 55-200 and 35 mm.

 

I want something that covers more than the distance that the 18-55 does so that I don't have to switch lenses quite as often when traveling. I don't mind carrying the other two lenses around but would like a good "walk around lens" that might save me from missing a shot, if I don't have enough time to switch lenses.

 

I'm looking at the 18-200 or 16-85....I know that with the 18-200 I might lose some image quality at the further distances. If you were me, which would you pick?

[highflyingrealtor]

Well I love my 55-200 when I know what I'm going to be shooting but my new walkaround lens is the Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 Macro OS HSM. Sounds like you might need more reach for your versatility but I can't say enough about the Sigma, if 70mm (105mm) can get you to where you need to be.

[bionicman97]

You actually have the perfect kit with two light weight but very good value consumer zooms then the great fast prime for lowlight.

 

If you really want the big P&S one soluation then yes the 18-200 Nikkor is the do all. This lense is a love or hate relationship with most people. I'm in the former camp. I had both these lenses and the 16-85 and 18-200 when I shot DX.

 

The 16-85 is pricey for the range it gives you but it is of the 5 consumer lenses the best in quality by a hair. The extra 2mm on the wide side may not seem like a lot but if you shoot a lot indoors you will find that 2mm is very valuable. The downside beside the price is the very limited zoom on the long end only to 85.

 

I found that I used the 18-200 90% of the time. Having the extra range on the long side built in was just too tempting not to always have it on my D300. Just be aware that except near infinity is it truely a 200mm and yes on the long end its a bit soft, but for even 8x10 blow ups more then good enough.

 

 

A lense you don't mention that you might consider that is cheaper but just in between is the 18-105 nikkor. You can find it ofte for saile on craigs list as it is the kit lense that came with the D90 and lots of those people often flip the lense as they use other lenses. I shoot that as my primiary lense on my D5000 and feel no need for anything much wider or longer. The only beef I have with it is it like the 55-200 has a plastic mount.

 

Here is a good read from Thom: http://www.bythom.com/nikon-dx-lens-summary.htm

 

Good luck,

 

I never thought about looking for the used kit lens for a higher model camera. That's a really good idea.

[11Bravo]

 

I'm looking at the 18-200 or 16-85....I know that with the 18-200 I might lose some image quality at the further distances. If you were me, which would you pick?

 

I am a Nikon shooter with 3 bodies and 8 lenses with more on the way. Despite sinking a small fortune into pro lenses, I often reach for my 18-200 lens because it's compact, lightweight and has a great range. It's so versatile, it can be used for 90% or more of your photos. I've shot numerous commercial photos with this lens and really like it.

 

Good luck!

[misskitty123]

You actually have the perfect kit with two light weight but very good value consumer zooms then the great fast prime for lowlight.

 

If you really want the big P&S one soluation then yes the 18-200 Nikkor is the do all. This lense is a love or hate relationship with most people. I'm in the former camp. I had both these lenses and the 16-85 and 18-200 when I shot DX.

 

A lense you don't mention that you might consider that is cheaper but just in between is the 18-105 nikkor. You can find it ofte for saile on craigs list as it is the kit lense that came with the D90 and lots of those people often flip the lense as they use other lenses. I shoot that as my primiary lense on my D5000 and feel no need for anything much wider or longer. The only beef I have with it is it like the 55-200 has a plastic mount.

 

Here is a good read from Thom: http://www.bythom.com/nikon-dx-lens-summary.htm

 

 

This is all good information to consider, Thank you. I love the lenses I have, the problem I run into is for example like this past trip we just got back from, I might want to take a quick candid shot of the people I'm with (standing right next to me) but then also grab a shot of architecture, or the stage show (photos allowed, just not with flash)... and trying to switch lenses in those situations can get cumbersome....I'm not sold on a P and S replacement lens (i.e. the 18-200) because I do have the 55-200 and it does take great pictures.

 

I'm really trying to find something that fills in the gap a little between like for example 25-100 ish.....

 

The 18-105 might actually be the perfect solution. And regardless, I'll always carry the 35mm, it's so small it's not a pain to carry and I LOVE the pictures I can get with it...

 

My next trip is a Med cruise (including Egypt) in December and goal is to at least give me the opportunity to catch a few photos that I might not have gotten otherwise (i.e photo of someone on the street and then immediately some architecture close up...)...

 

On a side note, has anyone been to Egypt and what lens did you use the most? Since it's a cruise, we will only have two days, so not doing an extensive tour but am curious what lens might work the best at least for the Pyramid area, I'd like to try not to have to change lenses with all the sand around.

[JoshRtek]

I've had my D5000 for about a year now and love it but I'm starting to think about another lens. I have the kit 18-55, 55-200 and 35 mm.

 

I want something that covers more than the distance that the 18-55 does so that I don't have to switch lenses quite as often when traveling. I don't mind carrying the other two lenses around but would like a good "walk around lens" that might save me from missing a shot, if I don't have enough time to switch lenses.

 

I'm looking at the 18-200 or 16-85....I know that with the 18-200 I might lose some image quality at the further distances. If you were me, which would you pick?

 

I have the 18-200mm and use it quite extensively. It's gets a bad reputation sometimes, but it really is a fine lens that will give you great results. Some people complain about it not being sharp, but it's just really about how you use it.

 

At 18mm, it's a little soft in the corners, but then it sharpens up quickly. 50-85mm is very sharp. I've found that 135-200mm, wide-open, focused to infinity is the weakest area of this lens. Stopped down and focused close, it's a lot better, but still not as good as a dedicated tele-zoom (like your 55-200mm).

 

However, for a all-in-one travel lens, it's hard to beat, and can make some fantastic pictures.

 

I've read that the 16-85mm is super sharp all the way around. It's about the same price as the 18-200mm (give or take). I've actually considered picking up this lens sometime in the future for my fiance's D3100.

 

Hope this all helps!

[bobmacliberty]

I can't comment at all on Nikon lens quality or bang for the buck since I have a Canon. I will say though that my 15-85mm lens is a great range for a walk around lens (I have a 1.6 crop body...close to your 1.5). I may have wanted more reach once or twice on my recent cruise, but I don't mind cropping an 18MP image.

[Multi-Cruiser]

I bought a Tamron 18-270 for my Nikon D40 about a year ago and have great results with it. I like not having to change lenses all the time and am quite please with the images.

[Cattie]

I'm also looking into buying a new lens so I'm glad I stumbled upon this post! I'm really looking at a 18-200mm lens just for the versatility. Which would you suggest for a Canon Rebel XS.

 

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC AF OS

or

Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

 

There's a major price difference but I'm not schooled enough to know the difference in the lenses. They both get good reviews, but I'd rather hear what you guys have to say!

[pierces]

I'm also looking into buying a new lens so I'm glad I stumbled upon this post! I'm really looking at a 18-200mm lens just for the versatility. Which would you suggest for a Canon Rebel XS.

 

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC AF OS

or

Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

 

There's a major price difference but I'm not schooled enough to know the difference in the lenses. They both get good reviews, but I'd rather hear what you guys have to say!

 

The Canon lens performs a bit better than the Sigma, but whether it's enough better to justify the price, it's hard to tell from here on the sidelines. A third option would be the Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC. It costs slightly more than the Canon, but performs as well with longer reach.

 

Here are technical reviews of all three with graphs that illustrate the sharpness of each very well.

 

Sigma 18-200: http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1007/cat/31

 

Canon 18-200: http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1219/cat/11

 

Tamron 18-270: http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1217/cat/23

 

Dave

[trophy_23]

Sigma makes some pretty nice lenses, I have found though (and it could be bad luck) that finding a sharp copy of a sigma is hit and miss. I have had much better luck with getting sharp copies of Canon lenses. Again this is not to take away from their product, I do have a sigma lens in my lineup, but personally I tend to stick with Canon if it fits the budget.

[chipmaster]

There are few unbiased surveys about quality about lense, but here are several worth a read about "bad" copies and "realiability"

 

http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2010.09.20/lens-repair-data-40

 

http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2009.11.01/lens-repair-data-35

 

http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2010.03.06/this-lens-is-soft-and-other-facts

 

Its interesting to find that some of the highest repairs and returns are actually around the very most expensive and then again there are some non OEMs in the mix at the top. Buying Canikon or other major brand is no gurantee of good or bad or better quality either way around, YMMV.

 

Nothing is free, buy the same plate as the camer body you are almost certainly paying a premium but for that you do get some additional assurance that they have made sure the lense and body talk to each other. Go thirdparty and they are almost alway reversing engineering things so sometimes you get issues beyond the standard less for cheaper.

 

Sigma makes some pretty nice lenses, I have found though (and it could be bad luck) that finding a sharp copy of a sigma is hit and miss. I have had much better luck with getting sharp copies of Canon lenses. Again this is not to take away from their product, I do have a sigma lens in my lineup, but personally I tend to stick with Canon if it fits the budget.

[dodger501]

I just sold off my Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 and my Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VR on eBay. Used part of the proceeds to buy a Nikkor f/3.5-5.6 VR.

 

I don't do sports shooting any more and those lenses were just gathering dust. This new one is better for travel and I have high faith in my D700 to handle low-light situations.