ramon_v__california_

<p>the 18-70mm is a great lens. like the others, i got my first one with the D70. then on it went on the D70s. then on the D200. i still have two of this lens --- one on the D90.....i can say the real update version of the 18-70mm is a brand new 18-70mm.</p>

<p>my 3rd party gems for fun of the hobby (got paid for some of their services, too):<br>

sigma 17-50mm f/2.8<br>

sigma 50-150mm f/.8</p>

 

<p>i have the the non-OS sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 and i use it for weddings and other serious events where i get paid. it's a very good lens. i use it on a D90. the sigma might be front heavy for the D5000 (not sure). if you are conscious/discriminating of balance, the tamron will suit you better. i believe it's lighter than the sigma........just a thought.</p>

<p>i'd bring both and let the situation dictate what to use. if you are skilled enough using two non-zooms and no lens swapping, better. it's an important shoot. make the most of it.</p>

<p>maybe lynn doesn't have any canon equipment anymore and wants to start fresh from scratch and on a budget.</p>

<p>if that is the case lynn, you can't go wrong with the D90. i have done weddings, big and small, and portraiture with a D90 and a D200 before. then i switched to a pair of D90s and i still got paid. some clients don't look at expensive equipment. they pay you for what you can deliver.</p>

<p>also, some consumer and prosumer plastic-mount lenses will run circles around thousand-dollar ones.</p>

<p>just a thought.</p>

<p>you will be happy with the 5100 and a couple of lenses. well, maybe three.</p>

<p>in my opinion, a lighter f/2.8 zoom (even w/out VR) is still a better travel lens than the 16-85mm VR partnered with either the 35mm or 50mm f/1.8</p>

 

<p>just go out and take pictures. enjoy the hobby.<br /> call your Nikon, "my camera" :-)</p>

<p>i didn't catch most of the comments. let me add that for serious portraits that i get paid for, i still use my nikon 70-210mm af-d (both indoors and outdoors) more than my sigma 50-150mm f/2.8. </p>

<p>if there is difficulty getting away from busy background, i wouldn't get the 16-85mm for portraits.</p>

<p>i would just replace the 18-200mm lens. get the 35mm f/1.8. that will be the cheapest route. <br>

a better lens than what you have will give justice to the capabilities of the D50 ----- still a great camera, imo.</p>

<p>i agree with "one lens at a time". unless you really need the long range NOW. The 35mm f/1.8 doesn't cost much. you can get that with your mid-zoom. doesn't occupy much space also.</p>

<p>please don't look at the hand</p>

<p>i just hope you did the sensible thing of not selling :-)<br>

you can always rent if you need a second lens. or just save and get at least the 80-200mm.</p>

<p>enjoy. you'll have fun with that lens.</p>

<p>when i gave away my D60, i toyed with the idea of getting the D3000/D3100 for size and weight to mate with my 18-70mm. so i checked in here for feedbacks. for my everyday-carry/travel combo, it is now the D90 (which i already have at the time with the D60) with the 18-70mm and the 35mm f/1.8 in my pocket. if i know what i am doing that day, it can be just the D90 and the 35mm......the D90 is not really that heavy compared to the D60 that i was used to.</p>

<p>i find it hard to go out of the house or travel with just one lens. the 35mm as a second lens doesn't occupy much space in one of your pockets.</p>

<p>ABSOLUTELY WORTH IT! You'll be happy. </p>

<p>I gave my D40 to one of my granddaughters some three years ago because my brother sold me his D60. I thought it was an upgrade. Not.........</p>

<p>My other granddaughter is getting the D60 for her graduation this June.............And guess what? I'm getting a D40. Aside from its great feature, it's still lighter than my everyday-carry D90 with the 35mm AF-S.</p>

<p>new inferior cards?</p>

 

<p><strong>8 samples to choose from?! </strong><br>

You are one lucky buyer. You can't go wrong there.</p>

<p>I will second all what Eric said about the Sigma 50-150mm. The extra stretch of 15mm is very useful at times. I have one and I use it from weddings and other events (street and indoors) to sports. I got lucky with my copy.</p>

<p>Hello, CC. I think the focus is more on the cheek and/or nose. I could be wrong. The knuckles are more focused than the bracelet so I guess it didn't front focus. It might have just looked that way because of the contrast of the bright and blue metal on the skin tone of the performer. But my set of eyes are getting old.</p>

<p>Good luck in your choice, Ajay.</p>

<p>Excellent superlight combo together with the 35mm AF-S on any non-motor body.</p>

<p>i don't know if there is a katz eye model for the D200. it might help.<br>

i put one in my old D70s. but didn't need one for my D200.<br>

i wear prescription glasses.</p>

<p>WOW! Excellent capture. Wonderful images.</p>

<p>@Robert K: This is based only on my sample of the Sigma and non-motorized Tamron; and my friend's sample of the Tamron motorized. Yes on both the better glass and better AF at both high and low contrast........there is no stabilization on the Sigma.</p>

<p>When I do weddings for White couples and Asians, contrast is low. And I'm happy.<br>

Weddings for Hispanics, there is very high contrast and I'm also happy.<br>

I always use AF and switch to MF on portraits, indoors and outdoors. In this category, I'm also happy.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I have the sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 and the tamron 17-50mm (non-motor). i turn to the sigma for more critical shoots. to me it is faster and sharper than the tamron version that i have. my shooting partner when i do weddings use the tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 (motor version), and she admits the sigma is faster and sharper than her version of the tamron......the sigma is heavier than the tamron but better built.</p>

<p>take note that the sigma takes a 72mm filter (if you use one) and the zoom ring turns the opposite direction.</p>

<p>I'd experiment with f/5.6 (because of the white ice) in A mode at ISO 800-1200; or S mode with 1/500-1/800. Something like what Jerry is suggesting. Good luck.</p>