advertisement


The next lens for my Nikon

chiily

chiily

PFM Special Builder
I'm just a beginner here, coming back to photography with my daughter in tow.

Having bought a D3300 with the standard lens (18-55mm) and really loving the picture quality, I'm thinking of buying a lens with a little more reach.

I have settled on two Nikon lenses so far, the AF-S DX 24-120mm f/4G ED VR II receives good reviews. As does the AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II,

Interestingly the 18-200mm I can find cheaper new than the 24-120mm. And the 18-300mm only a little more than the 18-200mm, though the former is only shown to have VR and not VR II. Is the price reflecting general usability, weight and size...

Has anyone experience of these lenses and whether they will work as everyday, jack of all trade lenses?

Ta.
 
I had the 18-200 VR on my D300, it was good but had bad lens creep.

I also have the 18-70 and the 70-300 so I sold the 18-200 and use the two to cover most bases, I also have a 35mm prime for the close in stuff.

However I recently bought the Nikon P900 and it has a reach of 24 to 2000, and is quite simply amazing.

So I use that for my birding instead of the D300 and the 70-300.

Cheers

John
 
why not pick up the 55-200, it's sharp, inexpensive and often available dirt cheap! The 18-55 you have is better than the 18-70, so no need to move that on.

The 18-200 was a marvel when it was released. And with a little practice, you can shoot around its shortcomings. You can get them pretty cheap now, too. Though I'd suggest the 55-200 in preference.

You can't go wrong with a 50 1.8 (D or G), and the 35 1.8DX is a marvel at a low price too. Having a prime or two and learning the magic of zooming with your feet and low-light photography are *good things*.

HTH
 
Rico said:
why not pick up the 55-200, it's sharp, inexpensive and often available dirt cheap! The 18-55 you have is better than the 18-70, so no need to move that on.

The 18-200 was a marvel when it was released. And with a little practice, you can shoot around its shortcomings. You can get them pretty cheap now, too. Though I'd suggest the 55-200 in preference.

You can't go wrong with a 50 1.8 (D or G), and the 35 1.8DX is a marvel at a low price too. Having a prime or two and learning the magic of zooming with your feet and low-light photography are *good things*.

HTH
Click to expand...

^This^

I've seen great things from the 55-200 and the suggestion of a good quality prime is always a good one.
 
Rico said:
why not pick up the 55-200, it's sharp, inexpensive and often available dirt cheap! The 18-55 you have is better than the 18-70, so no need to move that on.

The 18-200 was a marvel when it was released. And with a little practice, you can shoot around its shortcomings. You can get them pretty cheap now, too. Though I'd suggest the 55-200 in preference.

You can't go wrong with a 50 1.8 (D or G), and the 35 1.8DX is a marvel at a low price too. Having a prime or two and learning the magic of zooming with your feet and low-light photography are *good things*.

HTH
Click to expand...

Great advice, thank you. I'd not thought of that lens at all..and cheap too.

Is this the 55-200mm you are referring to Rico NIKON AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-200MM F/4-5.6G ED VR II?

I'm a returnee to photography. During my teens I had a Ricoh RX7 and did all my own B&W development and printing; if I still had the space I'd buy a 2nd hand 33mm SLR and do that again. The RX7 only ever had a 50mm 1.7 lens and it took some fabulous pictures. Yes, I will consider a decent prime too.
 
yep, that's the one (the VRII), or go for the original VR which should be cheaper. http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/55-200mm-vr-ii.htm
Here's a mint VRI - mint- boxed with hood - for 109. http://www.ffordes.com/product/16020209302131

you can get the 50 1.8D for less than the cost of a bottle of decent vintage champagne. That'll bring back your Ricoh memories #8 ) http://www.ffordes.com/product/10072316359969 if you're going to buy new 'G', then you've got the option of a 1.4D... tough choice!

enjoy.
 
If you buy any 'D' type lenses i.e. the 50mm f1.8D check that your D3300 has a focus motor. Otherwise go for the AFS lenses.
 
I would recommend a 24mm prime on a crop sensor but the lack of focus motor makes it difficult, a 50mm will be the equivalent of an 80mm so a bit limiting.
I did a picture a day with a D300 and 24mm its a good combination how about swapping cameras? D300/D700 it would give you the ability to use old AF and manual lenses.

The 24-120 is a FX lens so if you move to FF it will work.

Pete
 
Ahh yes good point chaps, I guess I don't think much about those cameras without the focus motors. 50 1.8 G it is, then!

Or as Pete suggests, a D300. #; )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top