Quick question!

[skeeder]

Help!

I've been reading up on DSLRs so I'm sad to say, I'll use my computer lingo here, I'm a n00b.

Anywho, The camera I've picked out is the D50. Mostly because I'm just starting and didn't want to dump alot of money on it.

I recently looked at amazon, they have two different lens kits.
Nikon D50 6.1MP Digital SLR Camera with 28-80mm f3.3-5.6G AF Nikkor Zoom Lens
Nikon D50 6.1MP Digital SLR Camera with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED AF-S DX Zoom Nikkor Lens

which lens kit would be the smartest?

thanks in advance,

[britkev]

I just bought the 28-80mm kit last week, and am regretting it slightly - the 28 becomes a 42mm with the digital crop factor, and will leave you seriously wanting in the wide angle range... the 18-55 is worth the extra money.

[coldrain]

The 18-55 is the smartest... the 28-80 is just a dealer dumping old film DSLR "kit" lenses.

[skeeder]

thanks!

Do you think I should spend $650 on the kit? or get the body only and 18-70mm f3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S DX?
http://beachcamera.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=NK1870G

[D70FAN]

thanks!

Do you think I should spend $650 on the kit? or get the body only and 18-70mm f3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S DX?
http://beachcamera.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=NK1870G

If you can spring for the 18-70 DX then it is the better lens by far.

[erichlund]

If you can spring for the 18-70 DX then it is the better lens by far.
I agree with George. I never used the 18-55, and I understand that optically it's not much different from the 18-70 (within its range), but it has less range, and, when you do want to manually focus, you have to switch to manual mode. With the 18-70, you can leave it in auto-focus, actually auto-focus the lens and then fine tune the focus manually. The build quality is also, from the samples I've seen, better on the 18-70.

As I said, I cannot address the image quality of the 18-55, but I had the 18-70 with my D70, and I was very satisfied with the image quality I got from that lens.

[coldrain]

The 18-70 D70s kitlens vignets quite badly, and the 18-55 is very nice contrasty... so I am not sure the 18-70 is a better lens (except for build quality).

If you are prepared to pay so much for the 18-70 kit lens, maybe you may as well consider the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC, a better lens on the whole, and with a nice constant f2.8 aperture.

[erichlund]

The 18-70 D70s kitlens vignets quite badly, and the 18-55 is very nice contrasty... so I am not sure the 18-70 is a better lens (except for build quality).

If you are prepared to pay so much for the 18-70 kit lens, maybe you may as well consider the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC, a better lens on the whole, and with a nice constant f2.8 aperture.
I have to disagree here. People will shoot a white wall (or a sky shot), see a little darkening of the corners and say "bad vignetting". Well that's a bunch of B.S. Yes there is some MINOR vignetting fully wide angle and wide open, but there are very few photos that you will even notice it in, unless your job is photographing white walls. Frankly, I never saw vignetting in a "normal" photo that I took with that lens. It simply was not an issue. I, at least, can say that as a user of the lens.

I suspect that most of the consumer build DX and EF-S lenses have some degree of vignetting, simply because they are designed for the sensor size, so they have a smaller image circle. I've seen much worse vignetting on MANY a full frame lens on a full frame (film) camera, because there was a time when that was a hallmark of a consumer grade lens. In fact, this is one of the complaints people are making about the 5D. They buy the darn thing, not realizing they have to buy Pro quality glass to avoid a lot of the issues that are inherent in full frame consumer grade glass, vignetting being one of them.

[rawpaw18]

I really like my 18-70, and never really paid a whole lot of attention to the vignetting until we had our first snow. Zoomed out on my snow shots it was noticeable. I cropped a couple shots down a little and they looked great. I'm still very pleased with this lens and to me that extra 15mm is worth the extra money.
-Rich

[erichlund]

I really like my 18-70, and never really paid a whole lot of attention to the vignetting until we had our first snow. Wide open on my snow shots it was noticeable. I cropped a couple shots down a little and they looked great. I'm still very pleased with this lens and to me that extra 15mm is worth the extra money.
-Rich
This is exactly one of those situations where you could see it.

I would think most snow shots could be stopped down pretty aggressively to give depth of field and show off all those crystals. And, oh by the way, pretty much get rid of any vignetting issue. Perhaps something to think about for the next snow opportunity.

[Bullitt]

The 18-70 D70s kitlens vignets quite badly, and the 18-55 is very nice contrasty... so I am not sure the 18-70 is a better lens (except for build quality).

If you are prepared to pay so much for the 18-70 kit lens, maybe you may as well consider the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC, a better lens on the whole, and with a nice constant f2.8 aperture.


I would have to agree with you coldrain, not that the 18-70mm DX lens vignettes, but that buying a kit is not always the best way to go. Get the camera in your hand and do some browsing at your local camera shops, try a few different lenses and decide which will work best for your needs. I bought the kit with 18-55mm originally and that lens is now long gone replaced by a Sigma f2.8... I had an 18-70 DX Nikkor lens at one time and found it to be a very good lens with no vingetting to speak of...

[rawpaw18]

This is exactly one of those situations where you could see it.

I would think most snow shots could be stopped down pretty aggressively to give depth of field and show off all those crystals. And, oh by the way, pretty much get rid of any vignetting issue. Perhaps something to think about for the next snow opportunity.

Thanks a lot erichlund,
I will definitely try this if we get another snow. I always appreciate the help. Also I meant to say I had the lens was zoomed out and not at the wide side. Edited.
-Rich

[goletitout]

Hey Rawpaw ! I´ve got exactly the same combination: D50, 50mm 1.8 AF-D and 18-70mm Nikkor zoom and I´m very satisfied with it ! The 18-70 is no low light lens though. But stopped down to f6.3-8 it´s very very good, and it´s hard to see a difference to the 50mm 1.8 set to f4-8. Especially between 24mm and 65mm, my 18-70 REALLY shines. 18mm and 70mm are also good, only a tiny bit worse. But I mean...it´s quite normal for a lens not to show its peak performance at the extreme focal lenghts, even stopped down.

[rawpaw18]

Hey Rawpaw ! I´ve got exactly the same combination: D50, 50mm 1.8 AF-D and 18-70mm Nikkor zoom and I´m very satisfied with it ! The 18-70 is no low light lens though. But stopped down to f6.3-8 it´s very very good, and it´s hard to see a difference to the 50mm 1.8 set to f4-8. Especially between 24mm and 65mm, my 18-70 REALLY shines. 18mm and 70mm are also good, only a tiny bit worse. But I mean...it´s quite normal for a lens not to show its peak performance at the extreme focal lenghts, even stopped down.

I have been pleased as well but now I am looking for more reach and speed.
I've been looking at the Sigma APO 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG/HSM for my kids sports. Cory just got the Nikon VR version for his D70 and I can't wait to see his hockey photos. What is next for you? And don't kid yourself, there is always a next.
-Rich

[dallas75287]

I'm still learning about my D70s and photography. So this might be a silly question. What do you mean by "stopped down to f6.3-8"? Is that the same as putting on aperture priority mode and setting to f6.3 or f8, etc? Or is there

I usually shoot in aperture priority mode unless I'm shooting action. I have both the 18-70 and 50 f/1.8 lens.

Thanks.

[Jason25]

That's what it means, you've got it!

[goletitout]

You wanna know what´s next for me...you´re right, there´s always a next.
I don´t know. First I wanted the 17-55 2.8 instead of the 18-70, but couldn´t justify the price which is 3-4 times as high. The 18-70 is spectacular for its price and I´ll definitely keep it as I´m no pro. Perhaps the SB600/800 or the 35mm f2 would be nice further investments :D.

[Bullitt]

Jason25,

I notice you have a Tokina 80-200 f2.8 lens, have you ever seen a comparison between this lens and the Sigma 70-200 f2.8, I am considering adding another lens to my bag and so far I am leaning towards an f2.8 in the longer zoom range. Anyone know the price difference in these lenses also?

[rawpaw18]

Bullitt
@ bhphotovideo Tokina $610
Sigma $789

On sigma4less they have the Sigma for $724.

Jason any info would be helpful as well on the Tokina.
I have been trying to get some info on the Tokina but as of now I'm leaning towards the Sigma, unless I hear otherwise.
-Rich

[Jason25]

The Tokina is a little soft wide-open, but is sharp at f4. At least my copy is. It's built like a freakin' tank, weighs 3 pounds. It's pretty much all dense metal as well, very sturdy. It has a perfect build for going hiking, and can handle a little abuse :) AF is fast enough for not having a focusing motor, I have no complaints at all. The Sigma seems sharper wide open from pics I've seen, but I haven't seen a direct comparison.

I bought it off KEH for a good amount less than the price of a new Sigma, so I'm a happy camper. I may eventually trade up to a Nikkor, but that'll be awhile I think :)

The Tokina has been discontinued, and is now in the Archive section of Tokina's website, so you'd probably wind up with a used copy unless you find old stock elsewhere.

[rawpaw18]

Thanks for the hands on info. I keep up with KEH too, just to see if one or the other shows up.
-Rich