Lens for a D70

[jeff_hershberger]

I am a bit new to the SLR world and have a Nikon D70. So far I have

been using the 18-70mm f3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S DX Zoom Nikkor lens that

came with it. I am looking to get a zoom lens for it and the Sigma

28-300mm F3.5-6.3 MACRO is attractive in the fact that it seems to be

an all in one lens for general shooting and something I could feel

comfortable with in those situations when you can only take one lens

or only want to have one lens and not get caught with the wrong one on

to get that quick shot.

 

My last camera was a Minolta DiMage 7i and that had a great built in

lens and it spoiled me with its great range in a single lens.

 

It seems as if the Sigma lens is priced about the same as the 70-300mm

f/4-5.6D ED AF Zoom-Nikkor lens which would pick up where my current

one drops off. Just about everyone I know says to stick with the Nikon

glass because it is ?ED?. But alas, I am still a novice in the SLR

world and have no way to compare the Sigma lens to the Nikon one. Can

any one tell me how it does compare to the ED lenses? Money isn?t

really the issue, image quality is. I will be taking this lens on an

Alaskan cruise this fall and do not want to come home with a bunch of

pictures that I am not happy with because I didn?t get the ?ED? glass

as everyone is saying.

 

Any assistance that you can provide in this decision making process

would be greatly appreciated. On a side note, I will be going into NYC

this weekend and visiting B&H at the least and quite possibly making a

purchase then, so if you can get back to me before then I would

greatly appreciate it.

 

If anyone wants to email me directly: jeff.hershberger@comcast.net

 

Thanks,

Jeff

[kenneth_beatty]

If money is not an issue, the buy a 24-120 vr and a 70-200 vr. Otherwise the 70-300d is a good choice but comparing it to a sigma is like comparing apples to oranges. I personally would stay away from a 28-300 anything. Especially if image quality is what you are after. Remember that photography is a compromise and the less you have to compromise the better.

[basscheffers]

With something starting at 28, you lose wide angle on your D70, so keep that in mind.

 

300 becomes 450mm equivalent on a D70, which is quite long, especialy when hand-holding this slow lens that you have to stop down and make even slower to make it sharp!

 

Both Tamron and Sigma now have 18-200mm zoom lenses especialy made for DSLRS. If you are on a limitted budget and do want one lens for all occasions, those might be interesting. They give you both wide angle and a good telephoto capability.

 

Google for reviews on any of these lenses to help you decide which one is best!

[bwcombs]

Ditto what Kenneth said. If you have the money, buy the glass.

 

I have a good friend who went on an Alaskan cruise, and he was

going to take along his 28-200mm. (He had the kit lens to take

along as well.)

 

I loaned him my 80-200mm f/2.8 ED, which is a great lens. His

pictures are awesome. It does matter what you put on the front

of that body. And you do say the quality matters.

 

When you go to B&H, take your camera, and try out some lenses.

Look at their used collection as well. And ask for their advice.

They're pretty helpful there.

 

Don't scrimp. Get good glass and be happy.

[k_michael]

Well, I had a slow 70 - 300 mm zoom and sold it because of all the shots I missed. I spent the money for an 80 - 200 f/2.8 AFS and never looked back. Lens hunting is no longer a problem for me.

[jeff_hershberger]

LOL ok, well money is not the entire deciding factor, but it's in there. I don't think I can get a $1000 lens past the warden right now, especially with all the stuff we are doing to the house for an impending sale later this year.

 

I didnt realize the 70-300 was that slow of a lens. The 80-200 does sound interesting though. (I was aware of the 1.5 factor on DSLR) so that would still put me at 300 compared to 35mm. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[peter_s]

Maybe get a second hand 80-200 f2.8? Any of the AF ones will work fine on your camera, even the older models. A second had one-touch 80-200 f2.8 AF ED should set you back not a lot more than the 70-300 ED new would.

 

If you're cruising then you don't have to carry your equipment over long distances, so perhaps the added weight of a pro lens (IMO its main drawback) can be overlooked.

 

When I can't hump the f2.8 lens around I use a cheap as chips Sigma 55-200mm f4 - 5.6. Its image quality is probably better than the 18-x hyperzooms and it covers a good enough range that you won't have to be swapping lenses much.

 

Alternatively, if all this seems like too much bother, effort and weight, you might consider going back to an all-in-one digicam. I've used the successor to your old cam, the Minolta A2, and it is extremely versatile and the anti-shake built-in will certainly help combat any ship movement.

[peter_cofran]

can't go wrong with 70-200. its around $700 new depending on current rebate, used $550-700 on ebay. used market isn't much of a bargain because of the high demand for it.

[rich_taylor____mequon__wi]

I am a strong advocate of putting out the money for good glass, even if it hurts a little. Once that lens is on the camera, every shot you take will be a product of its quality (and your skill). Skimp at the outset and, since you mentioned that quality matters to you, you will regret having saved a few bucks to purchase an inferior lens.

BTW, I saw today (online) that B&H has, in their used dept., an 80-200mm/4.5-5.6 zoom in "10" condition for $109. It's not the fastest zoom around, but you can turn up your ISO setting in a pinch.

 

If you're going to NY this weekend, remember that B&H is closed on Saturday but open Sunday 10am - 5pm.

[jeff_hershberger]

What about a NIKON AF 28-200mm f3.5-5.6G IF-ED Zoom - Nikkor or 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor?

 

Sorry guys, I am just still very new to the SLR world. I dont mind changing lenses and all, I just dont want to do it every other shot and would like a little versatility. I do enjoy the camera very much so and have wanted to get an SLR for a long time. The all in one was nice, but I want to be a real photographer now and learn how to do it the right way :-)

[jeff_hershberger]

Went with the 28-300 ED Nikon lens. Picked it up at B&H on Sunday. So far I like it very much even with the limited time I have had to play with it. One question though. The 18-70 that came with the camera seemed to have a little rubber skirt around the base of the lens where it mounts to the body, but the 28-200 does not. Not that its that big of a deal but the silver mounting ring on the body is now visible and didnt know if not having that skirt around it mattered or not.