lens for nikon D100

[edwardchen]

I am going to get nikon D100 but I haven't decided what kind of lense

(s) to fit it. I have two tamron zooms now 28-200, 28-300, and two

bodies F60, and F80. I surely get 50/1.8 as many of you recommended.

I tend to sell 28-200 and keep that 28-300. although my tamron zoom

can fit D100, I doubt it will give the best result. So I prefer Zoom

Nikkor. What do you think the best nikkor zoom lense under USD 600?

I read some review that lense pretty much affects the result on D100.

Thank you. I'm open to suggestion.

[edwardchen]

I'm looking zoom at range 24-120.

and by the way what is different D and G lense type? is there any difference to operate? G lense is cheaper, it that mean D type is better optically?

[ellis_vener_photography]

G-type F mount Nikkors are simpler mechanically, which accounts for the price

difference. The aperture settngs are controlled drom the body not the body and the

lens. The G type 24-120mm Nikkor is a markedly better lens as it is designed for the

more stringent requirements of digital photography.

[ed_hopper]

Markedly better? I wouldn't go quite that far. It's very slightly sharper, has slightly better contrast, and has a bit less distortion. Its big advantage is the VR feature - which works very, very well. At least, that's my take on it after shooting with it for a week and after comparing it with my older 24-120. It still doesn't qualify as a pro lens for an F5 shooting Velvia, for example, but the D100 (and S2) are much less demanding of lens optical quality.

[edwardchen]

thank you for your fast response.

 

Ellis, thanks for info. I think my tamron lens is similar to G type.

 

Ed Hopper:"...but the D100 (and S2) are much less demanding of lens optical quality".

 

are you saying that my tamron 28-300 XR will do just fine?

[lwg]

Try shooting the same scene with the Tamron and a better zoom or prime in the store. Go home and compare the results. I think you will then want to drop the Tamrons, but if you can't see the difference why not keep them. I have the 28-105 Nikkor and it is a great zoom, but it is not wide enough on the D100 to be your only lens. I also have the 18-35 for the wide end, as well as a few prime lenses for when I have the time to change them. The two zoom combo works Ok for me and the image quality is very good - especially for the price.

[berg_na]

The 28-105mm Nikkor is a very sharp and versatile lens because it also has built-in macro capabilities. To complete the system, you'll need a wide angle zoom and the 18-35mm is a great performer at an affordable price. I also picked up a 70-300mm for long range shots. It's compact, light, and inexpensive, but I'm finding that its slow optical speed seriously limits its usefulness. I'd stick with Nikon lenses for best compatibility and optical quality.

[jason michael]

An excellent zoom combo for the D100 would be the

 

Nikkor 24-120 AFS VR or the Nikkor 28-105 IF

 

and the

 

Nikkor 18-35mm.

 

This is a good setup for digital due to the 1.5X focal range multiplier but it all

depends on what you intend on photographing. The 28-105mm is handy as it can do

decent macro work (it doesn't compare to a macro lens but in the real world it works

pretty well) and the 24-120 AFS VR is handy due to the VR which allows you to shoot

at about 3 stops less shutter speed than necessary (I absolutely love this feature and

use it all the time). I would personally ditch the Tamrons (not just because they're

Tamrons but because I do not trust any 28-200s and especially 28-300s). If you

want a cheap telephoto consider the Nikkor 70-210 AFD as it will get you to 300mm

(on the digital that is). Again, let us know what your shooting style is and I'm sure

our comments would become more helpful.

 

Cheers,

[ed_hopper]

Edward, there's a world of difference between the Tamron 28-300 and the Nikon 24-120/VR. The Nikon is much, much better. However, the perceptible differences between the 24-120/VR and a pro-level f/2.8 lens on the D100 are virtually negligible if the 24-120/VR is working at f/8 or better. Ultimately, you're being limited by the resolution and other characteristics of the 6MP CCD array, and that's why I feel the 24-120/VR is a good match for a 6MP DSLR.

[cole_...]

Ditto support for the prime (50/1.8d). Also, ditto comments that if you compare the Tamron zoom to another Nikon zoom with less focal range, you'll notice a HUGE difference in image sharpness and contrast. The hyper-zooms are simply very soft and IMHO great for "recording the moment", but not much else. I'd say 24-120 for the digital if you want zoom coverage, but suggest getting the most limited zoom range you can accept to help improve image sharpness and contrast. The more glass (and mechanics) between the image and film the more impact on the final image.

[steve_chan5]

It depends on how often you plan to be shooting at wider than F8. If you stick to small apertures and want the zoom range, then 24-120 VR is probably an excellent lens. But if you like to be able to shoot at a wider aperture, then the handiest lens we have is the 35-70/2.8. It isn't a very large zoom range, but it has excellent sharpness and has a usable (but not great) macro. Our sample is kind of old, and seems very vulnerable to flare but it is an otherwise good lens. The effective focal is basically 50mm-105mm which covers normal to short tele

 

 

It would probably be fine to get the zoom and a prime like the 35/2 AF. The 50/1.8 is a sharper lens, but the 35/2 becomes a 50mm equivalent on the D100.

 

Steve

[edwardchen]

Thanks for recommendation guys.

 

Jason:I like to travel, so zoom is perfect for me. My interests are mainly landscape, and architecture. People is secondary,only limitted to family and friends. that's all. I am never interested in wildlife because the equipments are much more expensive (correct?)unless the griz bear comes close and strike a pose.

 

Many of you recommend 24-120 VR or 28-105 IF and 18-35. yeah..I forgot about 1.5x multiplier on D100. It makes me consider 18-35.

The new 24-120 VR is so tempting though. but i still prefer 28-105 IF just because I already have a set of 62 mm filter. the new 24-120 VR is at 72 mm and 18-35D ED IF is at 77 mm. I will need tiffen 62 mm to 72/77 mm step up ring. Has anybody used this step-up rings? How do they affect the lens operation? I'm just afraid it is just creating more vignetting problem in 18-35 mm. If anybody can solve my filters size problem?

 

Jason: I tried to ditch my 28-200 Tamron. But they only priced it for $75. It's a year old and I bought it for 300-something. I'd rather keep it or give it to my relatives or friends.

[david_sandoz]

I stayed with Nikon lenses. My primary lens is the 24-85mm macro and I have added the 70-300mm ED to cover any of the other focal lengths I may need. After over 12,000 images, I am very happy with those choices. Next will be some kind of ultra-wide angle lens. For now I am using my old Coolpix 990 with the auxiliary wide angle and fisheye attachments.