Zoom bokeh question

<p>I use a D300 with 30mm f/1.4 Sigma, however I need to use a standard zoom for an upcoming social event. I was looking at the low cost Nikon zoom options, (say the 18 - 55mm VR) however reviews say that the bokeh is poor compared to a lens like the Sigma. Attributable to the not very low f stops of the standard zooms and the optics. What are the standard zoom lens options available where the quality of the bokeh is not compromised. I realise this is partly subjective, but those are the opinions I would appreciate. Thanks. ps I realise I could spend a small fortune to achieve... but I was trying to avoid. </p>

<p>Alas, these things: wide-to-normal/short-tele zoom range, a fast-ish aperture, and pleasing optical qualities (like a friendly-looking bokeh) don't come cheap. Tamron's 17-50/2.8 might suit you (it's popular with event shooters trying to keep the price down), but the heavy hitter is Nikon's 17-55/2.8. Yup, quite spendy. You can find them used, and in great shape, for about twice what the Tamron costs new, if it helps to think of it in those terms.<br /><br />I use the same Sigma 30/1.4 that you mention and understand what you're looking for. To avoid the artifacts and lack of DoF control that come with the slow kit zooms, you just have to avoid those lenses. No easy way around it.</p>

<p>A lens like the Nikon 18-55 VR has a maximum aperture at the long end of f/5.6, which can make it difficult to get backgrounds sufficiently out of focus, depending on your distance to the subject and to the background. In a different focal length range, the Nikon 70-300mm VR has rather good bokeh, although perhaps not as good as your Sigma prime. In its longer focal lengths, getting backgrounds out of focus is no problem, even with an f/5.6 maximum aperture.</p>

<p> </p>

Tamron 17-50/2.8 without stabilization. This is the cheapest solution. It's also available stabilized (with VC for "vibration control"), and then

there is the new Sigma 17-50/2.8, it's stabilized as well. The most expensive solution would be the Nikon 17-55/2.8, built like a tank, not

stabilized, like all the others DX only.

 

The Nikon is twice as much as the Sigma and more than four times the price of the non-stabilized Tamron. Personally I have the stabilized

Tamron and had major quality problems, although as long as it works, it is a killer lens. I'm going to buy the Sigma in a few days.

 

Stabilization won't help you for event photography, as you need to freeze motion, but to have it is very handy in all sorts of other situations.

Think of photographing in a church, etc. Sure, a tripod stabilizes even better, but in our times of routine harassment of photographers, it is not

uncommon that tripods are not allowed. Thus, my recommendation would be a stabilized lens, otherwise the non-stabilized Tamron, and if

you really can't stand the idea of putting a third-party lens on your Nikon, you know what you need :)

<p>Even at f/2.8, for focal lengths less than 24 mm, you won't get a lot of blur (unless your subject is really close to the camera which brings in other distortions).</p>

<p>I've only used the 18-70 and 18-200 much, but I don't think many of the consumer lenses, perhaps none of them, are likely to have good bokeh.</p>

<p>I'm pleasantly surprised that my 70-300 VR has much better bokeh than I thought it would, but when I really want nice oof blur, I reach for my 105mm f2.5 AI lens. VERY nice. Actually my 55mm Micro, when shot wide open at f3.5, isn't bad either.</p>

<p>As Nish points out, f/2.8 isn't all that wide. The drawback to the 30mm is that on a cropped sensor camera you get a field of view of 45mm with the bokeh of a 30mm focal length. The only way a Tamron 17-50 is going to get you a <em>better</em> bokeh is by shooting @ 50mm. If that is the case, I would really recommend the Sigma 50mm f/1.4. It is a <em>very</em> nice lens with excellent bokeh.</p>

<p>if you want better bokeh than the sigma 30, your options are limited and priceier: sigma 50, nikon 85, tamron 90, nikon 105dc, nikon 135 dc...see a pattern here?</p>

<p>bokeh quality tends to increase the longer the focal length, due to compression. i've owned the 30 and the 17-50; the 17-50 has good IQ ans is great for a DX camera, but you dont buy that lens for its bokeh, which is better than kit lenses but not spectacular. the tamron 28-75 has better bokeh than the 17-50, but the 17-50 is sharper at 2.8. if i were you, i'd just get the 17-50 and use the 30 when you want extreme DoF control.</p>