Want to replace 18-55 mm Kit lens for DX camera

[sunilmendiratta]

<p>HI,</p>

<p>I would like to replace my 18-55 mm VR lens for D5000 camera. Reason is in low light sometimes this lens fail to focus(during nautical twilight times).<br>

Can anyone suggest for better lens which is tak sharp and i want to use it for landscape work(not just wide angle).</p>

<p>Regards,<br>

Sunil</p>

 

[errol young]

<p>You can use a SB600 flash as a focusing aid even when not using the flash function. Or try the 50mm 1.8. It is great and cheap</p>

[sunilmendiratta]

<p>Thanks for the suggestion. I think 50 mm will not work for my landscape work as i have DX camera(1.5 X). i thought of 17-55 but that is 1500 USD..out of reach....</p>

[andylynn]

<p>If you want a 2.8 but can't afford the Nikon, the next thing to look at is the Tamron 17-50/2.8 VC. Another excellent option (though not wide enough for traditional landscape work) is the 35/1.8 AFS. Heck, most D5000 users should get that lens anyway :)</p>

[yann1]

<p>You won't find a lens as good as the 18-55 for a cheap price.<br>

Consider the 35mm 1.8 prime lens since the 50mm 1.8 doesn't suit your needs (still, I think you should get one...)</p>

 

[Matt Laur]

<p>Remember, he's mentioning that the 18-55 won't focus in poor light, which means I presume that he's not manually focusing. The 50/1.8 will not AF on the D3100, since the D3100 doesn't have a built-in AF motor, which the 50/1.8 requires. The 35/1.8, however, is AF-S, and will work. It's a pretty good deal. Whether or not that focal length is a good choice is something that Sunil can determine by seeing how 35mm treats him while using the zoom he already has.</p>

[nishnishant]

<p>Errol,</p>

<p>How do you use the SB600 for focusing but prevent it from firing the flash?</p>

[nishnishant]

<p>Matt,</p>

<p>He has the D5000 not the D3100, but what you say is true for that camera too!</p>

[sunilmendiratta]

<p>What about 16-85 and 18-70 mm lens? Are they any good in terms of sharpness and AF.</p>

<p> </p>

[frank_skomial]

<p>Flash Auto Focus Assist lamp has limitted range, and with 50mm/1.8 lens, for SB900, the max illumination is 33 feet or 10 meters, per Nikon data, that is perhaps too optimistic.<br>

Your lens is much slower, and the effective range will be reduced.<br>

Rather than trying a flash to help focus, it will be less expensive to get a 35/1.8 lens. Perhaps flash for nautical twilight times pictures will be useless.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>The 16-85 and 18-70 are also not good low light lenses.</p>

[drjoder]

<p>Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 perhaps?</p>

[luis_g]

<p>For night time landscapes, perhaps a sturdy tripod would be your best bet. The 18-55, stopped down to f/6.3-f/9 is a very good performer (read Bjorn Rorslett's assessment). Unless you mean cityscapes when you say landscapes, f/2.8 is not going to do you much good. BTW, reach around to the right side, and switch the focus from AF to M and focus manually. It's not pretty, but can be done.</p>

[dbcooper]

<p>Sunil, in twilight conditions you may be exceeding the ability of the auto-focus (AF) mechanism in the camera to work properly due to not enough light reaching the AF sensor/detector. A faster lens will admit more light, maybe enough for AF to work. It's hard to tell with twilight...it depends on the lighting conditions. The 16-85 and 18-70 don't present any advantages in passing more light for AF - they have the same maximum aperture opening as your lens. You'll want to try something with a lower f/number, remembering that the lens is wide open when focusing (and metering) regardless of the aperture you have is set for to take the shot.</p>

<p>Remembering that each full f/stop doubles the amount of light a lens will pass, the f/3.5 of your current lens is only 2/3 stop slower than an f/2.8 lens, so those lenses aren't all that much of an advantage on the short end of your zoom lens. You might see worthwhile improvement going to one of the f/1.8 or f/1.4 lenses. An f/1.8 lens (2 full stops faster) will pass 4 times as much light as your current lens (e.g. 35mm f/1.8 DX). An f/1.4 lens (2 2/3 stops faster) will pass about 6 to 7 times as much light. If conditions are too dim, those lenses might not AF properly either...there are no guarantees, but they certainly will give you your best chance of success with AF in twilight conditions.</p>

<p>I don't know where you're shooting, but what I do sometimes with slower DX zooms in twilight or night conditions is find a light source to AF with. It might be a boat's marker light, or a dock/pier light, a channel marker, a building - something that's lit. First I make sure the camera is in single focus mode, and not continuous focus mode. I use a single focus point in the camera's viewfinder, usually the center point (see your camera's manual on how to set that). Then I aim the focus point at the light source. Once I get focus lock (using the AF-L button), I switch the lens to manual focus so the AF can't bump it out of focus, being careful not to touch the focus ring on the lens. Then I re-compose the shot and take the photo. The AF mechanism depends on having enough light and contrast in the viewfinder focus point. If you give the camera those two things, the AF will work.</p>

<p> </p>

[sunilmendiratta]

<p>Thanks a lot for the elaborated response, I really appreciate for the time and thought you put in. Well for 1.4 or 1.8 i have only option of 35 mm nikon or sigma.</p>

<p>I have Manfrotto tripod and ball head and i use that extensively for my day shots too.So tripod is my best friend.</p>

<p>Cooper you are right about this single point focus( infact that is the only mode i use) but recently i faced issue where there were no lighting point and i wanted to focus on the foreground rock at beach and camera could not focus on it(I was using f16 then i dropped to f11 for DOF).I guess this issue is going to remain on any lens.<br>

I am thinking to use flashlight to first achieve focus and after achieving the focus switch off the flashlight(After AF-L) and shoot or change to manual focus.<br>

Now my question is 18-55 is comparable to 16-85 or 18-70 in terms of sharpness and resolution.</p>

<p> </p>

[andylynn]

<p>There is no real difference between those lenses. Probably no difference at all when stopped down. From what you've said about how you're using the camera I don't think you have anything to gain from a new lens. Just going to make some suggestions:</p>

<p>When shooting on a tripod, particularly at night, focus manually. If your scene is static, AF is just going to get in the way, and as you saw it doesn't work in the dark. Also, with the tripod, you generally want to turn VR off - the camera being steady can confuse the VR and cause it to make the image less steady. Also try turning on Exposure Delay mode. (You press the shutter, the mirror flips up then it waits a second or two before firing the shutter, which reduces camera shake, good for static scenes.)</p>

<p>F/16 on a DX camera and normal zoom lens does not help you - there's a diffusion issue that kicks in starting around F/11 that actually reduces sharpness. I actually almost never go past F/8 myself.</p>

[sunilmendiratta]

<p>Thanks Lynn for the response. I always put remote release and exposure delay mode into action on tripod. Well i keep VR off but thanks for reminding me.</p>

<p>So you are saying when lenses are stopped down to f11 or f8 then there is no difference in them in terms of sharpness and image resolution? Is it true in daylight also...So all these lens are equivalent if i want to shoot say f8 or above(f16 f22..may be i am out of my mind to use f22)....</p>

<p>Because i want to understand if pro lenses have same sharpness after stopping down as consumer lenses? I am just trying to understand please forgive me about my knowledge....</p>

<p>Many Thanks..</p>

<p> </p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>I'd replace it with a 17-50 Tamron. Then I'd get a 35mm f1.8 for really low light work to complement it. (I never travel without this lens anymore, pretty often it's the one on my camera.)</p>

[CvhKaar]

<blockquote>

<p>and camera could not focus on it(I was using f16 then i dropped to f11 for DOF</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It does not realy matter which aperture you choose, since the camera will try to focus with maximum aperture anyway, so you might want a faster lens.<br>

A possible contender for another lens , apart from the tamron 17-50, might also be a sigma 17-50 f2.8 or a 24-70 f2.8 ( if thats wide enough for you offcourse) , but every zoom option in the F2.8. range will require some investment i guess... </p>

[hugo_laporte]

<p>+1 for the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, it has an exceptional IQ and wide aperture for the price, you can't go wrong. The wide aperture will help the camera focus in low light, especially if you compare it to the 18-55 at 50mm that has a max aperture of f/5.6, which blocks a lot of light compared to f/2.8.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>Sunil, sometimes pro lenses do have better sharpness even stopped down. However, the lens you have is actually quite sharp - surprisingly so considering the price - and stopped down you would be very hard pressed to notice a difference of sharpness or resolution. Stopped down, it barely vignettes at all, so the only issue would be distortion - it has a barrel distortion on the wide end - but so does the Nikon 17-55/2.8. So the main advantage to any f/2.8 lens would be the light coming in as you set up the shot, which lets you see more in low light and helps the camera autofocus, but still there comes a time in the evening when autofocus is just not going to work with any reliability, and judging from your landscapes in your gallery you don't need AF in these situations anyway.</p>

<p>The lenses you mentioned, the 18-70 and the 16-85, are not pro lenses - they're kit zooms, with optics only a bit better than the 18-55, and no noticeable difference when stopped down and on a tripod. So that's why I'd recommend not buying a new lens now, because the alternatives don't really fix the problems you mentioned.</p>

[sunilmendiratta]

<p>Thanks a lot for the responses i really appreciate it.</p>

<p>Lynn - You saved some of my hard earned money.</p>

[Two23]

<p>The AF system focuses on an edge, where it detects contrast. Pointing it at a uniform beach gives the AF nothing to "grab" on to. No lens will AF in that situation. I own a Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 and a Nikon 18-55mm VR. There is no difference in sharpness at f8. The f2.8 lens can focus more easily at night, if it can find edges to focus on. The Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 would be the same. The used ones sell for less than $400. Sharpness comes from the tripod, and a faster shutter speed perhaps. BTW, I am mainly a night photographer.<br />Kent in SD</p>

[CvhKaar]

<p>Sunil,<br />When it comes to dusk / night photography, it sometimes works , if the subject allows for it, to focus with help of a simple cheap torchlight pointed at the area/subject you want to focus on, and switching off the the torch ( or point it in another direction...) while keeping focus locked.. ( this works for me, and it works with almost every lens .... ).</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>for real-low-light work, you can do a few things:</p>

<ul>

<li>use flash</li>

<li>use a tripod and longer exposure time</li>

<li>get a faster lens</li>

<li>raise ISO</li>

</ul>

<p>however, if you're shooting landscapes at twilight on a tripod, you don't really need AF, a constant 2.8 aperture or a faster lens. i'd just shoot a longer exposure at f/8 or f/11 and base ISO with manual focus. if you want the sharpest possible pic, use Live View, manual focus, and also use a cable or wireless remote.</p>

<p>now if you're handholding, that's a different story. that's where faster lenses come in handy. forget the 18-70 and 16-85 as they dont offer much improvement in terms of wider apertures. at f/8 or f/11, you'll see similar results from consumer and pro lenses. what pro nikkor lenses offer is build quality, faster AF motors and constant aperture.</p>

<p>if you're on a budget, your best bet is the 35/1.8. i would just go ahead and pick that one up in any event. if/when you can spend a little more, or want something wider, the tamron 17-50 is very good for the price. alternately, you can look into the sigma 17-50 OS which is around the same price, or a used nikkor 17-55. however, the nikkor won't balance all that well on a d5000 and there is no real benefit to a AF-S motor for shooting landscape.</p>

<p>btw, you will get diffraction at f/13 and beyond, so f/11 will be sharper than f/16 with any DSLR. i would only go below f/11 if DoF is more important to you than sharpness.</p>