philip_brazina

<p>Okay, I know I said the above, but I got a few PMs from people I know and they said it would be worth it to get this one:</p>

<p>Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 2161 Lens</p>

<p>Is this really much better than the above 3? I found it for an awesome price and at a reputable place.<br /> </p>

<p>I have my 50mm 1.8 prime which I will put on the Canon 500D (as suggested above) to remedy my macro dilemma. I have my 18-105mm for general scenery, portraits, etc...</p>

<p>I am looking for a lens to handle distance (bell in the bell tower, bird watching), etc.... distance.</p>

<p>Basically, my question is for $300, what is best lens I can get. The budget is limited as this is a gift and that was my criteria.</p>

<p>So far, I have limited to the following:</p>

<p>*Nikon 55-200 VR (item 2166) http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/486717-USA/Nikon_2166_55_200mm_f_4_5_6G_ED_AF_S.html<br /> *Sigma 70-300 APO DG http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/549304-REG/Sigma_5A8306_70_300mm_f_4_5_6_APO_DG.html<br /> *Nikon 70-300 (non-VR - item 1928) http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/207359-USA/Nikon_1928_Zoom_Telephoto_AF_Zoom.html</p>

<p>I do need distance... 200mm minimum, but I think I would like to try my hand at 300mm.</p>

<p>Budget is limited at $300. Reading reviews, the Nikon 70-300 VR lens is not much better than the Sigma one.</p>

<p>I am leaning towards the Sigma as it is supposed to be fairly sharp and with my previous camera I did not have IS, so as I am used to shooting without it.</p>

<p>Any advice on those 3?</p>

<p>Brian and Glenn, this is exactly what I was seeking... thank you.</p>

<p>I was hoping to get xx-300, but I suppose now that I have 3 choices to choose from, I can compare and see if the 200-300 is really worth the extra money.</p>

<p>I was looking at this in the interrum, but not sure if it is worthwhile. Brian, I will look at your links above.</p>

<p>http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/207359-USA/Nikon_1928_Zoom_Telephoto_AF_Zoom.html</p>

<p>and I think this is the one you are stating to use:<br>

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/486717-USA/Nikon_2166_55_200mm_f_4_5_6G_ED_AF_S.html</p>

<p>Is the VR all that hype? I ask as my Sony didn't have any IS and 99% of pics came out perfect, even when on a moving train. For my nightshots, they are all taken with a tripod.</p>

<p>Sorry for so many questions, but, as pointed it, it is better to do something right initially then to keep trying. :)</p>

<p>Thanks for all the advice so far. I left out some info which may answer some questions. One is that it is my bday coming up and my criteria was a budget of $300. I like macro, but my priority at the moment is zoom which would be more important, as I could (if needed) take a pic at full 10mp, then crop out what I want, and in turn get the macro I am seeking. I am currently doing that with my 18-105 lens and while a hassle, the end does justify the means.</p>

<p>My first question: Do those +1/+2/+5/+10 macro filters that screw on the front of lenses actually do anything? I have a 50mm 1.8 prime and if it is worthwhile, I could use that to solve my macro issue as they are fairly inexpensive as I see them on ebay. I think I may have even bought them for my Sony and forgotten about them.</p>

<p>As for zoom (forget about the macro for now), can anyone suggest an accompanyment lens or replacement lens to my existing one. As Andrew points out above, the D200 does have a built in motor. I do like to take a lot of pics while on vacation, and sometimes I am not close enough to take pics.</p>

<p>I know the best option would be to rent one for a weekend, but I first need to limit my choices (hopefully to 3), then I will go to B+H and see if they have what I want.</p>

<p>They are generally helpful, but I like to know what I want before going in and getting the sales person's advice.<br>

<br /> The guy at J+R Musicworld (NYC) actually told me that he ONLY recomments the Nikon 18-200mm VR lens and that all others do not compare. When I bought my 18-105, based on reviews I saw online, it was actually sharper than the 18-200. His advice would have cost me $700, while my lens was only $150.</p>

<p>Does this clear up a few details? Again, my apologies for not putting in all the details as I thought this would be like most boards where I get no replies. :)</p>

<p>I'm not sure if this is in the right forum, so please forgive my ignorance as I am a newbie to this board.</p>

<p>My old camera was a Sony 828 which had a built in 18-200 lens.</p>

<p>I just got a new Nikon D200 and using an 18-105 VR lens. It is working nice and I like the quality, but lacking the following functions: macro, zoom.</p>

<p>I don't really want to change lenses too often (or at all if possible) until I get more familiar with this DSLR.</p>

<p>I am looking for at least the quality of the clarity and sharpness of my existing VR lens.</p>

<p>Someone advised Sigma as they have a 70-300 as well as a 18-300 lens which does have a macro switch. What this switch does, I do not know, but hoping it will let me get nice macro shots. I am not against buying the Nikon/Nikkor brand, but usually you are paying a premium for the name. I am seeking to spend about $300 for what I am seeking. Also, I am not limited to 300mm as it can be more, but preferably not less.</p>

<p>On another board, it was advised I go to a camera store and try out the lenses, but before I do, I want to at least know 2-3 lenses for which to research to test.<br>

The types of pics I take can be found at http://phillydog.info/events/perfect and I have recently added to the Flora section (so you can see the Nikon pics).</p>

<p>-ANY- help is appreciated.</p>

<div></div>