A Backward Lens Queston From A Pro

[dcraton]

Hi and thanks in advance.

 

I have a great collection of pro lenses for our business: tanks, fast, heavy, love them.

 

However, rather looking to upgrade, I am looking for ONE lens to attach to a D200 for general walkabout day

shooting. Most important factor for me is IQ. I really don't care about AF speed or having another low light

lens or f/2.8 zoom. Would be nice to at least start at 28mm with a bit of reach. I am Sigma friendly, but a

Nikon lover.

 

I want light, durable, affordable and not at 24-120mm.

 

And please, refrain from a D300 or D700 upgrade discussion. This is a lens question as I have little knowledge

of consumer lenses. Again: one lens for walkabout, out with the wife, etc. lens.

 

Thanks and no tanks.

 

David

[niccoury]

I've always been a fan of the 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 but on digital it's not so wide.

 

The 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 was my main lens as a newspaper photog before I upgraded.

[lex_jenkins]

Take a peek at Matt Laur's travel portfolio for samples from the 18-200. Looks like a winner for what you've described.

 

For the money it's hard to beat the 18-70 DX. I bought one more than three years ago with my D2H, mostly out of curiosity about the DX format. I hardly used it for the first year and even considered selling it. Now I use it extensively for casual photos, especially of people oriented events, with and without flash.

[guillaumemartin]

Add another vote for the bang for buck 18-70.

[Rene11664880918]

What about a D300 with...... (joke)

 

My vote for the 18-70

 

Rene'

[elliot1]

I suggest the highly affordable 18-135mm (light and extremely sharp) or 18-200mm (excellent zoom range, IQ and VR) if it is within your budget.

[tim_knight]

I would consider the Nikon 16-85 VR. It has more range and VR for those hand held shots. I do not have one but have read that is takes very sharp pictures.

[Peter_in_PA]

16-85 would be good. But later this week we might be seeing a new 18-105 VR! Equivalent f.o.v. of 28-157 or so. WOW,

that'd be sweet!

 

18-200 VR is great, too. I LOVE mine, but the 16-85 seems to have better image quality.

 

28-xxx would stink, I think. Too long at the wide end.

[Matthew Brennan]

Not that any thread should become a popularity contest - BUT - I too rate the 18-70mm DX lens as the best value for money lens from Nikon I have used. I regret selling my copy with D70 for the very same reasons you stipulate. Plenty acceptable IQ, in-expensive to purchase new, very lightweight and quite a useful focal length range on DX format.

[bob_hamilton2]

I'm not sure if you are a fan of Ken rockwell or not, but check out what he has to say about the 18 - 70mm Nikon lens.

 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1870.htm

[carl_becker2]

If you want something that starts at 28mm then I would look at the 28-105 Nikkor. Bjorn at :

http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html rates it a 4. Personally if I where not concerned about speed I would look at the 16-85mm Nikkor. I have and like the 18-70 as a carry around lens so I will not spend the extra for the newer 16-85mm. If IQ is the most important then maybe a couple of primes to keep it small and light would be better - 28mm f2.8 and 50mm f1.8 or 85mm f1.8.

[Two23]

No one has mentioned it yet, but Nikon is apparently set to release a new lens in the next week or so. It's the Nikon 18-105mm VR lens. Should be lightweight as it takes 67mm filters. Nikons newer consumer zooms tend to be lightly constructed but have great optics. The VR should make this one a real winner too. Downside is f5.6 at the long end, but we expect that. I too have all heavy pro glass and this lens is one I'm anticipating for the same reason.

 

 

Kent in SD

[ShunCheung]

David, I seem to recall that you already have the 18-70mm AF-S DX and 18-135mm AF-S DX.

It sounds like you are looking for yet another lens that is similar to those two.

Is there something wrong with those lenses that you need something else?

 

It would really be helpful if you can provide more information such as why you want another similar lens and your price range. I see people are recommending those lenses that you already have as they apparently are unaware of that situation. 18mm is not that wide on DX. For that reason you might consider the 16-85 for wider coverage.

[squiggs77]

When you say 'start at 28mm' do you mean 28mm equivalent for the DX format of your D200, which would be approximatly18mm? Or do you mean 28mm on the lens?

[robert_hooper1]

David,

 

If you already have the Nikon 18-70mm, and are not satisfied with the IQ, perhaps the Nikon 16-85mm would be a better

choise for you. Supposedly, it is a little sharper with less distortion. I would have purchased the Nikon 16-85mm myself

except that it is so slow (f5.6) at 85mm. I do like it's focal range, though.

 

I also have the Nikon 18-200mm f3.5-5.6 which can produce pretty good results if used properly, and gives you the

advantage of that great focal range.

 

There are always compromises to be made in designing a consumer grade, "all around", zoom lens, especially with the

longer the focal range designs. The lens you are looking for, David, may not yet exist: an all around walkabout

consumer lens with prime-like IQ. I'd like one of those. ;-)

 

Still, there are lots of great consumer grade lenses to choose from, in my opinion. With finessing of aperture and other

good photographic technique, good and sometimes great results can be had from all of the lenses I've mentioned.

[dcraton]

To Shun and Robert. I no longer have those lenses (been awhile) and was curious about some of the new lenses as I have mentioned in the past. . .not such a great pro shop here.

 

Shun: apparently before you make assumptions, you might consider that life and business are a constantly moving rather than remaining static. We spend time selling our services, processing, post, marketing, accounting, traveling, keeping a small office, and al the other things to make a business stay in the black. From time to time I come here because in all reality, many "amateurs" and "enthusiasts" are not only better photographers than we are, but have more time to pour over lenses and the like. P.net and other places have been good resources for us to gather info rather than buy lenses and send them back. I sincerely hope that is the explanation you were looking for. I did not see a reason to post this as I was simply taking the temperature of what was being used currently which seems to change often.

 

To the rest, thanks for great info on a very fast moving technology. Robert Hooper: right on and yes. That is the lens I am considering, but with Tamron and Sigma with a new bevy of lenses. . .I was only asking a simple question.

 

Just wanted a grass roots opinion of current thought. BTW--I despise the distinction between a "pro", an "amateur, "an enthusiast." It's all good, as long as we all have a camera in hand shooting.

[dcraton]

ps: I would rather start wider than 28mm. I just saw the Sigma and Nikon had several offerings starting at that point.

 

Thanks again. Good info.

[ShunCheung]

David, I made no assumptions, but since you had the 18-70 and 18-135 merely a few months ago and are now asking for recommendations for similar lenses, it would be helpful for you to point out whether you were happy with those lenses before or not. It doesn't matter why you sold them; if you are happy with either one of them, you can always buy one again. If you were not happy, you should explain why you were not happy so that people can make suggestions around those issues. For example, is 18mm wide enough; is f5.6 fast enough on the long end?

 

Moreover, your budget is an important factor. What you should consider if you want to spend $200 will be very different from $1000.

[nick_davis]

I like using the 24-120mm AF-S VR as a general purpose lens. I know it has had many mixed reviews about its performace at the 24mm end, but have been happy with it and I use it mostly at the wide end too. It focuses fast and covers a nice zoom range. I have heard that the 28-105mm is sharper at the extremes but I have no personal experience with it and I'd think that 28mm would not be wide enough on a DX format camera.

[dcraton]

Shun. Whatever. you did assume I had the lenses mentioned, but does it really matter? There are plenty of new

lenses out since we let go of all variable aperture lenses, save one, the Sigma 10-20mm. As a business owner, I

found most of them lacking for one reason or another. But that's me and for another post. I had let go of the

two aforementioned lenses more than a few months ago and yet would recommend them both and have here per the

right application.

 

Suffice it to say for our work we need fast, sharp glass with great bokeh, decent AF, and well built. But, that

is not new for us either. All of our current lenses are application specific and get a lot of good use.

 

I want a lens for me, not our business. One lens in a LowePro Toploader with an extra battery, card, a few other

small items. A just for fun snapshot lens. What a concept. A fun lens as I am starting to have more time to

shoot for fun and really--a camera, never leave home without it.

 

Right now I am leaning toward the 18-200mm VR II. I understand the newer copies are sharper than the initial few

runs. Has anyone else experienced that? I wasn't until this post and thanks.

[ShunCheung]

David, as I said, I did not make any assumptions. Last year, you mentioned several times in your own posts that you

had both the 18-70 and 18-135. How would I know otherwise? E.g.

 

http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00NmER

 

I thought it wouldn't make much sense for people to recommend to you lenses you already had before.

That was why I brought that up so that we can narrow down the choices.

 

The 18-200mm VR should be an improvement from those two lenses because of its wider zoom range and VR.

[Two23]

I would still wait a couple of weeks and see what is said about the supposed new Nikon 18-105mm VR. It has the potential to be a great small lens. Nikon has been steadily perfecting these.

 

 

Kent in SD

[andreasb]

The Sigma 18-200mm lens is almost perfect for a general purpose lens. Image quality is good, although there are better lenses (but you already have those), it is light weight, it is image stabilized, has a great range and can even do a fairly good job at macro photography. If I could only pick one lens that had to do as much as possible and have the broadest range of applications, this is it. I use it for when I go hiking and do not want to drag a bag of lenses along.

 

I live in an area where nature photography is very popular. We had a recent local photo competition (all amateur) where I did fairly well compared to others with far more expensive gear than I have and most of my winners were NOT taken with my better lenses (24-70mm f/2.8 and 70-200mm f/2.8 canon L series), they were taken with my canon 40D and my trusty 18-200mm sigma simply because of the weight factor when hiking. I strongly suggest checking one out at a camera store because I think it will surprise you.

[eric_arnold]

hi david, i personally prefer a fast and light walkaround 2.8 lens like the tamron 17-50 and 28-75. the IQ/cost ration of both is fairly high IMO. in your case, if IQ is paramount, you might want to skip the 18-200. if you already have some experience with the 18-70 and 18-135, you know what they can and can't do. if you are ok with slowish varible aperture, the 16-85 VR could be just the ticket. so could the supposedly upcoming 18-105 VR. on a budget, you could always go for the 18-55 or 18-55 VR. other options include the sigma 17-70 and 24-60/2.8. there really is no "right" choice, it all depends on what pops your flash.

[dcraton]

Thanks Shun, we are cool. You couldn't know. Reading post and replying to posts can be difficult at times. No harm, no foul.

 

Andreas, the little pro shop we do have here has a lot of Sigma lenses. I could try one out and may.

 

Kent: yes, I have been reading about the new lens. Would be very interesting.

 

Eric: you hit the bullseye and no offense to anyone else, for your reasons stated and others, we sold off all of our variable aperture lenses. We are not snobs, it's just a job. However, I just want light and a bit of range. I do have the Sigma 24-60mm I bought for a backup to my 17-55mm. It is a blessed surprise. I did a job with it Monday for just taking candids at a corp party to test the lens and it did very well.

 

Last thing, budget is a somewhat of a concern, not financially, just practically and we do have excellent post skills, software, and puters, so we can take an average photo (not blurred past "that" point) and put some pop in our flash.

 

Thanks for confusing me--a joke. I am glad and thankful for all your info.