Wide to Tele lenses --- which one to buy

Hello,

<br>I need to buy a wide to tele - all purpose fast lens, am looking

at the 20-300 Tamron and the 28-300 Sigma. I will mostly use this

lens as a landsacpe lens, occasionally macro and portraits. Any ideas!

<br>Nikon does not have an equivalent. I use an F5 and a D70.

<br>Any help is highly appreciated....

<br>

<br>Thanks,

<br>-Naveen

Neither of those lenses is very good. It doesn't make sense to put one in front of $3,000 worth of camera bodies. Get some primes or fixed aperture (2.8) zooms.

Based upon my personal experience with these two lenses, let me caution you that neither of them is a particularly good performer, especially once you go past 200mm or so. I found the images shot at anything other than perhaps f8 to be pretty poor optically. Very soft.

 

If you absolutely insist on buying a super zoom, then I would stick with the 28-200 versions, although frankly, they are nothing to write home about optically at the long end either. They are however, better than the 28-300's.

 

You will be better off selecting a shorter zoom in the 28-80 range and another in the 70-300 range and carrying both. Your photos will be dramatically better, although your gear will be less convenient. Everything is a trade off, but assuming that a sharp crisp image is what you want, I urge you to avoid the 28-300 lenses.

" Nikon doesn't have an equivelent" yes they do...28-200 afd not a bad lens for the money either. $200-300

Hi

 

I suggest the following

 

1- Nikon 28-105mm macro zoom lens for land scape, macro and portrait

= about $320

---OR--

2- nikon 24-120mm VR G all trael lens for landcape portrait and good zoom range but no macro = about $550

---OR---

3- Nikon 24-85mm and 70-300mm with you choice for g or non g version.= total about $480 for G version and about $850 for ed none g version

---OR--

4- 18-35mm for land scape and 80-200mm f2.8 + nikon 60mm macro lens = about $1250

-----OR---

5- the best are what we all dream about to have or already have :

NIKON: 17-35mm f/2.8 , 28-70 f/2.8 , 70-200mm G VR, 70-180mm macro = total about $5500

 

Most of people prefer to have either 20mmFOR $425 or 24mm for $309 as fixed lenses for landscape addition to their gear.

 

I hope that the above answer question

 

Best regards

 

Mohamed

sorry , forgot to add the price of nikon 60mm macro lens its $389 plus $1250

 

Thanks

 

Mohamed

Thanks for the responses, I guess I will have to settle for the Nikon 80-200 F/2.8...

<br>Thanks for the responses,

<br>Naveen

That's settling? There isn't much better. I'm curious why didn't mention that lens in your

original post.

Ditto Chris's reply. "Settle" on the 80-200/2.8? My friend, the difference in photos shot with the 80-200/2.8 and ANY 28-300 will be like night and day!

Without the polite second-posting from Naveen, this question and thread sound like the typical PhotoForum troll! "I want an all purpose-something-zoom for my F5"...

 

But now the question seems serious after all! And I hope Naveen found his answer ...'settling' for some superb optics for his fine camera's! Most of all I am happy to see all these polite and helpful contributiuns (apart from this one). You people really behaved well this time! [end of rant]

 

AH

Albin, Thanks for your response...

<br>Thanks a lot everybody for all the responses... my decision is made... Nikon 80-200 F/2.8 Yippie!!! Thanks again once again to everyone.

<br>-Naveen