Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    42

    Beginners Lens For Nikon D50 ?

    I am considering getting a Nikon D50 after some disaapointing results with the Panasonic FZ5. It is nothing more than just an idea at the moment - trying to weigh up pros and cons and whether I can justify the cost.

    What I was interested in knowing is what would be a good first general use lens for this camera which as much zoom as possible ? And how would it cost ?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Poznan, Poland
    Posts
    134
    Just got myself a D50 as well. After much (I mean MUCH) reading I decided to go with the Sigma 18-200mm DC lens. It's got everything I need in terms of quality, zoom factor, price isn't bad, and it's not really too big.

    I'm sure others here would agree (probably George will weigh in on this one was a similar response--I'm guessing). But definitely as a first-timer it's a great all-around lens that'll meet most of your needs until you're ready to add other lenses for more specific purposes.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    42
    My main problem is I also like to do quite a lot close up photography too. I assume I would need a separate macro lens for this ?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Poznan, Poland
    Posts
    134
    Right...no macro function on the Sigma 18-200. The alternative is as close to your subject as possible and then crop the image as desired.

    Of course, if you're a big "macro'er" then you might want to think in a different direction. Another point is that I've read that Canon users haven't always been too thrilled with the Sigma as where Nikonians seem overly pleased. Just another thought as you don't seem to have made up your mind completely on the camera.

    Here's some more info on the Sigma:
    http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05...ma18-200dc.asp

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Monterey Bay
    Posts
    6,029
    Quote Originally Posted by nwpoland
    Just got myself a D50 as well. After much (I mean MUCH) reading I decided to go with the Sigma 18-200mm DC lens. It's got everything I need in terms of quality, zoom factor, price isn't bad, and it's not really too big.

    I'm sure others here would agree (probably George will weigh in on this one was a similar response--I'm guessing). But definitely as a first-timer it's a great all-around lens that'll meet most of your needs until you're ready to add other lenses for more specific purposes.
    George agrees. Let us know how you like the 18-200, with the D50, once you get the hang of it. I would think that this would be the ideal combination for everyday (and even some specialized) shooting.

    Keep us posted.
    D7000, D70, CP990, CP900, FE.
    50mm f/1.8, Sigma 18-125, Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, Nikon 18-105 VR, Nikon 55-200 VR, Nikon 43-86 f/3.5 AiS, Vivitar 28-90 F/2.8-3.5 Macro, Vivitar 75-205 F/3.8-4.8, SB800.
    Ha! See, I can change...


    http://d70fan.smugmug.com/

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Monterey Bay
    Posts
    6,029
    Quote Originally Posted by nwpoland
    Right...no macro function on the Sigma 18-200. The alternative is as close to your subject as possible and then crop the image as desired.

    Of course, if you're a big "macro'er" then you might want to think in a different direction. Another point is that I've read that Canon users haven't always been too thrilled with the Sigma as where Nikonians seem overly pleased. Just another thought as you don't seem to have made up your mind completely on the camera.

    Here's some more info on the Sigma:
    http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05...ma18-200dc.asp
    As for macro... consider buying a $250 Nikon CP5200 which can focus down to 4cm, and fits in a fanny-pack, rather than a fixed-focus-length macro at $400+ that will only focus down to 8 inches.

    Low cost all-in-ones will generally out-macro a dSLR for less money. If you take a lot of macro shots then you can easily set up a low cost dedicated light box as well.
    D7000, D70, CP990, CP900, FE.
    50mm f/1.8, Sigma 18-125, Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, Nikon 18-105 VR, Nikon 55-200 VR, Nikon 43-86 f/3.5 AiS, Vivitar 28-90 F/2.8-3.5 Macro, Vivitar 75-205 F/3.8-4.8, SB800.
    Ha! See, I can change...


    http://d70fan.smugmug.com/

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Northern Colorado, USA
    Posts
    2,225
    Quote Originally Posted by George Riehm
    As for macro... consider buying a $250 Nikon CP5200 which can focus down to 4cm, and fits in a fanny-pack, rather than a fixed-focus-length macro at $400+ that will only focus down to 8 inches.

    Low cost all-in-ones will generally out-macro a dSLR for less money. If you take a lot of macro shots then you can easily set up a low cost dedicated light box as well.
    While the economics is all good, I'm not sure you have your priorities straight on the distance thing. The real key is to compare the macro power. A 1:1 is desired. A lot of zoom's have 1:2 macro, which means that they are only half size in the frame. There can be advantages to a long macro, especially if your target of preference is particularly skittish. You don't have to get so close. There's a reason they call the Nikkor 200 micro a legendary lens. OK, it's mostly sharpness, but I'll be it handles very nice at 19.4" from the target (Where it produces 1:1). Even butterflies won't be bothered at that distance.

    BTW: The close focusing distance on these cameras is usually with the lens at it's widest angle, which minimizes the magnification. It's interesting that the Nikon site publishes the focusing distance for a lot of these cameras, but doesn't publish the magnification at that distance. My wife's Canon S70 is the same. There's no mention of the magnification, even in the manual.

    Cheers,
    Eric

    Just thought of another thing. The cameras are so small, it's sometimes hard to set them up on a regular tripod. The longer shooting distance can be an advantage here as well, as you have room for tripod legs.

    Not that I mean to bludgeon you to death...
    Last edited by erichlund; 09-09-2005 at 06:50 PM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    42
    Thanks for the advice everyone. Looking into this more, I have decided that I cannot really justify the cost of a dSLR - it all starts to add up so quickly.

    At least this topic may be of use to others.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Poznan, Poland
    Posts
    134
    Quote Originally Posted by timk99
    Thanks for the advice everyone. Looking into this more, I have decided that I cannot really justify the cost of a dSLR - it all starts to add up so quickly.

    At least this topic may be of use to others.
    That's completely understandable and a reality that hurts!

    Even with finding some incredible deals I paid over $1100 for: D50, Sigma 18-200, Speedlight SB-600, and accessories. That does sting even when it's a great price for that combination!

    Of course you could always get the D50 kit and just add little by little. That certainly wouldn't hurt as much. I just wouldn't recommend spending less on a Point-n-shoot now since you're looking in the possible direction of a dSLR someday. Rather, save the money and add a little by over time and then buy in. It's very much worth it IMHO.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    42
    It hurts even more when you realise I live in the UK and pay inflated prices for everything. The D50 (body only) starts at 450. Thats around $828.

    The Sigma lens that was mentioned costs 260 (around $478)

    The macro lens would cost around 160 ($294)

    That is a total costs of 870 ($1600)

    For me, that is just crazy money to spend on a camera.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •