PDA

View Full Version : new lens for new D50



laxer3n7
02-01-2006, 05:27 PM
I just bought a D50 with the kit lens. I was wondering if there was a good lens that offered more telephoto power maybe up to 200-300. I was looking at the Nikon 70-300G and the tamron and sigma equivalent. I was also looking at the tamron 18-200 Di II. Are these good lenses. They are about as expensive as i can go right now.

Thanks Bryce

thebac
02-01-2006, 08:01 PM
The Sigma 70-300 APO version tends to be most highly considered in that range (focal and price). Make sure you get the right one, though, as several different 70-300 versions have been made by Sigma over the years. Note that I do not own this lens.

As for personal experience, I own the Nikon 70-300 G version, which feels (and is) cheap, but it'll do the job as long as there's enough light, especially as this lens needs some stopping down for sharpness.

If you're willing to go the used route, there is also the 70-210 f/4 constant. It has pretty good sharpness, and it's f/4 throughout the focal range. Build quality is quite nice, not pro-level, but solid. Its major drawbacks are the incredibly slow autofocus (and unfortunately, the manual focus ring is not the nicest, though usable, and sometimes preferable to the slow AF), the relative lack of contrast and colder colors (though the latter can be compensated for to some degree in PP).

If you're willing to go the used route and expand your budget a bit more, take a look at the push-pull version of the 80-200 f/2.8 ED. Again, focus is rather slow on this one (the focus limiter does help if you're shooting mostly distant subjects). However, everything else is top-notch, as long as you don't mind the weight (~3lbs). Used, this lens can be had for $350-$500.

There are also 70-210 f/4-f/5.6 lenses out there which seem popular, but I've never used one.

As for the Tamron 18-200, I don't own it or the Sigma version, but the Sigma 18-200 is reputed to be a better lens.

Bullitt
02-01-2006, 10:59 PM
I use a Tamron AF24-135mm f/3.5-5.6mm SP Macro and find it to be very sharp all the way through after comparing it to a Nikon 24-120 VR which cost quite a bit more than the Tamron.

While I'm here, has anyone used the Tamron AF 70-300mm LD f/4-5.6 1:2 Macro... I'm thinking of ordering this lens for the times I need a little more length and the price seems to be fair (159.00) for the amount of use it will get... I will use my 24-135 the majority of the time but sometimes that little extra would be nice...

Quirkitized
02-03-2006, 03:05 AM
From my personal experience I will vote for the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-f/5.6 Super Macro II APO :)

All the pictures taken here are with the 70-300 sigma apo
http://tmfiles.net/e107_plugins/autogallery/autogallery.php?show=Animals


http://tmfiles.net/e107_plugins/autogallery/autogallery.php?show=Forest

icjogger
02-03-2006, 08:18 AM
I have had my D50 for about 6 weeks. I got the body only and a Nikon 18-200 VR. I really like the lense, but I did have to pay $650 for it. I have heard very good things about the Sigma 70-300 APO DG. It has the red ring. Has a macro mode that looks really good.

Bullitt
02-03-2006, 07:52 PM
Nice pictues Quirk but I had some bad luck with Sigma lenses, tried the 18-125 and the 18-200 and got nothing but dark corners from both on my camera and this was at the tele-end not the wide end where vingetting is supposed to happen I've been told... That's reason Im using Tamron, no problems thus far with this brand, but thank you for the advice, I am kind of shy of Sigma lenses at this time. Mind you though, I did try the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 and it was great but I just needed a little more length than it provided.

K1W1
02-03-2006, 08:22 PM
Nice pictues Quirk but I had some bad luck with Sigma lenses, tried the 18-125 and the 18-200 and got nothing but dark corners from both on my camera

Silly question I know but you weren't using a digital lens on film camera by any chance?

coldrain
02-04-2006, 02:20 AM
From all 70-300 cheap lenses the Sigma APO DG version does perform better than the Tamron, Nikon and other Sigma versions. So, go try that Sigma 70-300 APO DG,and you probably won't be disappointed.

About the Sigma 18-200 vignetting, it does not vignet much at all for such a lens. You can not compare a 18-200 lens witha 70-300 lens though. But wide open the Sigma 18-200mm vignets 1.8 f-stops at 18mm, 0.7 f-stops when stopped down 2 stops. At 200mm it vignets 0.8 f-stops, 0.3 f-stops stopped down 2 f-stops.
The Tamron 18-200 vignets 1.6 f-stops at 18mm, 0.5 f-stops when stopped down 2 f-stops. And 0.6/0.2 f-stops at 200mm. That is hardly a difference between both lenses, and certainly not a lot of vignetting at 200mm for both, but a lot at 18mm.
The Sigma f2.8 18-50 EX DC vignets more!

So I have no idea what you saw, Bullitt. Still, the Sigma 70-300 APO DG is a much better choice than the 70-300 Tamron.

grace_m
02-05-2006, 12:23 PM
Hello,

I have a few questions about this Sigma 70-300 lens that seems so popular.
Will it say "APO" on the box? I saw a Sigma 70-300 Macro II (but it didn't say D or DX or DG) and another that did not have the "II" but I believe it said it was a "D/DG/DX"??

The "II" was on a "goldish/yellowish" box while the other was on a black box and was larger and came with a hood.

What should I be looking for to make sure I get the right one? The "red ring"?

I saw these at a big box store, and they were cheaper than the prices I've seen on the net so maybe these are different ones?

If yes, what are the differences between these 2 and the APO one that is recommended in this forum and everywhere all the time since these two are cheaper.


Another question:

I would like to do a few Macro photography every now and then. However I cannot afford the roughly CDN $600 that a dedicated macro lens will cost. So I have been looking for alternatives.

One of course is the Sigma above. And another is the use of Kenko extension tubes?? Like these (http://thecamerastore.com/ProductDetails.aspx?productID=31640)

and the attach between the body and lens so I can use them even with the 18-55 D50 kit lens?

Another that I saw is this "Close up lens" the Nikon 52mm No 0 Close up lens (http://www.vistek.ca/details/details.aspx?WebCode=134283&CategoryID=CameraLenses) which from what I understand attaches to the front of the lens??

From my understanding the problem with the Nikon one is that it attaches only to 52mm lenses? So I would be better off spending 4x more on the Kenko's???

Or is the Nikon one used for differnt things altogether??

And are there any other options I have for Macro?? That will cost less than the Sigma APO 70-300? Cause if it costs more, then I'll get the Sigma instead.

Many thanks!!!!!

coldrain
02-05-2006, 04:54 PM
The Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG Macro will say exactly that on the box. So you can not be confused with other versions of the lens.
The APO parts stands for specific glass elements used, the DG part stands for coatings and such specifically designed to perform better for digital SLR use.

About macro lenses, with extension tubes you can get closer, but they are cumbersome and not the easiest way to discover macro photography.
You can do worse than to look at the Sigma MACRO 50mm F2.8 EX DG, a very affordable and good macro lens, which costs I think a bit over 200 USD, not sure what that is in canadian dollars. It can double as a nice portrait lens too, being sharp and contrasty with a nice focal length.

Bullitt
02-06-2006, 02:28 AM
From all 70-300 cheap lenses the Sigma APO DG version does perform better than the Tamron, Nikon and other Sigma versions. So, go try that Sigma 70-300 APO DG,and you probably won't be disappointed.

About the Sigma 18-200 vignetting, it does not vignet much at all for such a lens. You can not compare a 18-200 lens witha 70-300 lens though. But wide open the Sigma 18-200mm vignets 1.8 f-stops at 18mm, 0.7 f-stops when stopped down 2 stops. At 200mm it vignets 0.8 f-stops, 0.3 f-stops stopped down 2 f-stops.
The Tamron 18-200 vignets 1.6 f-stops at 18mm, 0.5 f-stops when stopped down 2 f-stops. And 0.6/0.2 f-stops at 200mm. That is hardly a difference between both lenses, and certainly not a lot of vignetting at 200mm for both, but a lot at 18mm.
The Sigma f2.8 18-50 EX DC vignets more!

So I have no idea what you saw, Bullitt. Still, the Sigma 70-300 APO DG is a much better choice than the 70-300 Tamron.


I had dark corners in the photos I took with both 18-125 and 18-200 and actually the f2.8 18-50 DC never showed any signs of this at all...

fis
02-19-2006, 08:05 AM
I have had my D50 for about 6 weeks. I got the body only and a Nikon 18-200 VR. I really like the lense, but I did have to pay $650 for it.Where did you get the Nikkor 18-200 VR for $650? I'm having trouble finding it at any kind of discount.

erichlund
02-19-2006, 12:52 PM
Where did you get the Nikkor 18-200 VR for $650? I'm having trouble finding it at any kind of discount.
Adorama was originally selling it at this price. I haven't looked at the prices recently. I bought mine local, so I paid the full $750. I would have paid more, but I talked Samy's down to the locally competitive price.