upgrading lens on my Nikon D3200

[conichile]

<p>Hello, <br>

I would like to upgrade the lens on my Nikon D3200. Im at a point where i feel a little limited when taking some pics but not yet to upgrade the whole camera. Also, dont have the budget for it. I was checking the Adorama store site and i saw they have an article to maximize the use of the D3200. There they recommend a lens for "landscaping" another for "travel/arquitecture" etc. I do travel to a different country every year and i take pics of pretty much everything, from landscapes to building and food. I cant affor multiple lenses so i asked one of their experts and she recommended me the Sigma 18-300mm F3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM Lens for Nikon DSLR W/Accesory Bundle for $499. <br>

Is this a good bundle? is this a good upgrade/product for someone with my photographic skills, let say?I have been searching and it does have pretty good reviews but i would like to hear from someone more knowledgeable. <br>

Thanks<br>

Constanza</p>

 

<h1> </h1>

[fmueller]

<p>I always wonder what people think they might get when upgrading from a kit lens to another lens of roughly the same focal length. The kit zoom lenses from the large brands like Canon and Nikon are much better than most beginners would give them credit for. So if people are hoping for a noticeable improvement in image quality, I have a hunch that most of them are in for a disappointment after sinking money into a new lens.</p>

<p>You don't say what lens you have, but I would bet that quality wise it is not worse than any 18-300mm. That's covering a huge range in focal length, which can't be done at a reasonable budget unless sacrificing on quality.</p>

<p>One of the big deals about using a DSLR is that you get access to a whole system of camera bodies lenses, flash units and other accessories. There are many thinks you could buy that let you expand your photographic capabilities far beyond what a lens upgrade would do for you. The range of focal length you are looking at is far better covered by two lenses than by one. For example something like a 18-55mm plus a 55-250mm will give for better results than a 18-300mm. Then ad a 10-18mm for those dramatic ultra wide angle shots, and you have a set that will cover you for most eventualities. Later on you can ad a nice flash unit, or some macro accessory, or a tripod...</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Constanza,<br>

<br />The lenses that try to do everything, such as the 18-300 you were recommended, are typically typical "jacks of all trades, master at none", and optically no better than the kit lens you already have. They add convenience, nothing else. Plus, no idea what the Accessory Bundle is, but kits like this most of the time add nothing you really need.</p>

<p>The very first question you'd need to answer (for yourself, and it would also make it easier for us to help out) is this: "Im at a point where i feel a little limited". In which way do you feel limited by your current gear? What can you not do that you want to do? This is pretty important to know, because without understanding what problem you actually experience, how can we say a solution? Maybe it's not a lens, but rather a flash, tripod, maybe it's about getting a wider aperture, or wider or longer - no way to tell.<br>

So, I would not see that Sigma lens as a good deal, until you define clearly for yourself what problem you're trying to fix.</p>

[conichile]

Hello Mr. Mueller, the lens. Have is the one

that came with the camera the 18-55mm. I

also got a tripo and a flash.

Hello, Mr. Willemse,Since im still learning i will

do my best to explain when i say i feel a little

limited. Its is when i try to get a pic of the

whole landscape like from far away. I went to

see the castles in Germany. I tried to get a pic

from far away but the castle look like so small

it almost got lost among the trees. Also, all the

objects in the pics got a little lost a little blurry.

Its mostly for bigger things like pics of whole

landscapes. Maybe its me not being

experienced enough?

[Matthew Currie]

<p>If you want a whole landscape with a wide angle, individual objects will always be very small. Remember that although a different lens may give you nicer results in some ways, the focal length will always be the same. The best 18 mm. lens will provide exactly the same perspective as the cheap one.</p>

<p>If you are troubled by softness, of course it might be the lens, but the first thing to do is to check for focusing accuracy. The D3200's default focusing mode is not the most reliable way to get what you're aiming at, so it may depend on how you're doing it. It's unlikely another zoom, especially one with a wider range, will improve that. </p>

<p>Samples vary, but my experience with the 18-55 (I have the same lens on the same camera) is that it is reasonably sharp, with a "sweet spot" around F8. It's not exceptional, its contrast is only so so, and it is slow, but most of what makes this a cheap lens is its construction. Optically, it's not bad. I regularly see posts here and elsewhere in which people seek to upgrade the lens, without really saying why, except for the presumption that such a cheap lens cannot be good enough. </p>

<p>If you're looking to get a more normal perspective while at the same time covering a great width, you might want to investigate panoramic stitching software. </p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Constanza, what you describe sounds like you'd need a telelens, which is a lens with longer focal length than the one you have today. The focal length of your lens is 18-55, where 18 gives a wide view that takes everything in, and 55mm is more 'zoomed-in' - which will either help show details at distance, or focus on something smaller. It seems that 55mm length isn't sufficient for you.<br>

If on a budget, I think the best options for this are the Nikon 55-200VR or 55-300VR lenses; more expensive, larger but better alternatives would be the Nikon 70-300VR or Tamron 70-300VC. All of these are typically cheaper than the Sigma you mentioned, and optically at least as good. The downside is that you'll need to change between your 18-55 lens and this new lens, depending on what you need, but you get used to changing lenses quickly enough, to be honest.</p>

<p>These lenses would help make things at a distance look larger; of course the best trick is getting closer, but it's not always possible. As for images looking blurry - that can have a lot of reasons, and most of them have to do with experience. Getting a basic course in photography (maybe online if you cannot find one where you live), and/or good books on photography basics are really worth it if you want to get the best out of your camera.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>You're in good hands here. The long range lenses are for convenience, not for high image quality.<br>

The 50 to 200 something kit lenses are a cost effective way of adding to the utility of your whole set up without getting into fairly specialized and costly lenses, given that you have the 18-55.</p>

 

[joseph_iannazzone]

I would pick up a 55-200 or 55-300.

The former can be found for just over

$100 e refurbished. You can the decide

if your needs run wider or longer.

[conichile]

<p>Hello everyone, Mr. Currie i checked the photo stitching software that's really nice. It would definitely be of help. <br>

Mr. Willemse, you are right, i think that would help better. <br>

Thank you everyone, i will check out those 2 lenses and start practicing. </p>

[fmueller]

<p>I concur with everybody who suggested you need to get yourself a tele lens. I am a Canon shooter myself, but for you Nikon a Nikon <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-55-200mm-4-5-6G-Vibration-Reduction/dp/B000O161X0/ref=sr_1_1?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1466942702&sr=1-1&keywords=nikon+55-200">55-200VR</a> or <a href="https://www.amazon.com/55-300mm-4-5-5-6G-Nikkor-Digital-Package/dp/B00L88IWAS/ref=sr_1_2?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1466942777&sr=1-2&keywords=nikon+55-300">55-300VR</a> seem like the way to go. Either lens is far cheaper than the Sigma you were considering, and between your kit lens and the tele, I bet you will get better quality than with the super zoom.</p>

[Matthew Currie]

<p>Concurring further, I would agree that if you need more reach, it makes sense to get either the 55-200 or 55-300, which then gives you very full coverage. The 55-200 can often be found very inexpensively. I have the 55-300 (huge rebate when I got it with the camera a few years ago), and it's quite decent. </p>

<p>I travel with the two lenses, and though it's occasionally inconvenient to switch on the fly, it's usually pretty easy, and although it's not happened, I figure it's something of an advantage to have two lenses, so that if I drop or break one I'll still have something. The D3200 has a lot of cropping room, so if you can't get a great deal on the 55-300, you lose little with the 200, but the 300 is nice if you are chasing birds in the jungle and the like. </p>

<p>One small advantage with the two lens combination is that most variable aperture zooms may be a little faster at their wide end . So, for example, the 55-300 is faster at 55 than the 18-55 is at 55. Not by a lot, but a little. </p>

<p>People's mileage and motivation and priorities vary, but one of the things I like about my rig (D3200, kit lens and 55-300) when traveling is that it is, in the context of DSLR's at least, so cheap it's nearly disposable. After three years, and trips to several exotic locations, all the more so. It delivers very good pictures, but if I drop it in the ocean or a brigand robs me, it will not break my heart or my wallet. I keep toying with the idea of getting a better camera, as I like to do macros and the D3200 viewfinder is marginal, and I probably will when this one breaks or wears out, but so far it has performed flawlessly. </p>

[Silverrails]

<p>Hello, I just purchased a used Nikon D3300 with 18-55 kit lens, I also want a Telephoto lens, I am considering a refurbished Nikon 55-200 DX VR II lens at B&H Photo, it has good reviews. I have also been advised to look at the Nikon 55-300 DX VR lens, it is more expensive, but gives you more reach.</p>

[conichile]

<p>Hi. I just picked up the Nikkor Lens AF-S VR 70-300. It is a little heavy., I will definitely have to get used to changing them around and i will need a lot of practice. Thanks everyone for the advice</p>