Advice sought for Nikon lens choice.

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by imodan, Sep 20, 2005.

  1. imodan

    imodan Guest

    Hi all

    I have a Nikon D70 and want to get something in the 80-200ish range.

    I have narrowed the choice to three lenses.

    1. The very cheap nikon dx series. I think it's around the 55-200
    range. It's very cheap.

    2. The 80-200 AF-D 2.8 lens.

    3. The 80-200 AF-S 2.8 lens. (a second hand one for a little less than
    the cost of a new D lens)

    I want a fast lens cause I like to shoot without flash and my main
    subjects are really just my twin girls. However I have a few specific

    1. Is the cheap DX lens any good? Because it is specifically made for
    digital does that mean that it's optically more compatible? E.g Even
    though it's cheap because it's made for digital does that compensate
    any? Ultimately are the images I get going to be comparible with the
    faster much more expensive lenses as I would sacrifice the fast glass
    if optically they were the same.

    2. Of the two fast lenses is the S model worth the money? Is the
    focusing that much faster? Any real world experience with either lens?

    imodan, Sep 20, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. imodan

    DD (Rox) Guest

    Out of all those listed, I would recommend the 80-200mm AF-S as being
    the best option. It's a pearl! I really wouldn't bother with a cheap
    telephoto - they just don't cut it. None of them.
    DD (Rox), Sep 20, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. imodan

    george Guest

    TWIN girls have to fit in the frame with a 1.5X FOV factor? Are you
    photographing them across a football field? I think (based on having
    two girls that I often want in the same photo) you'll find something like
    the 28-105 or 24-120 far more useful. BTW--I have the 80-200 AF (non-D)
    f/2.8 and have never found it useful for photographing my kids except
    at school dance recitals and in marching band (literally across a football

    george, Sep 20, 2005
  4. imodan

    bmoag Guest

    The new Nikon 55-200 is in my opinion, having had the misfortune to buy one
    (and return it), the worst lens issued with a Nikon name badge. It is very
    light and small. There is nothing good to say about its mechanical or
    optical properties.

    The various 80-200 f2.8 Nikons are excellent lenses mechanically and
    optically. They are big and heavy. Very big and very heavy. The physical
    size of these lenses can make handholding the lens difficult for anything
    but faster shutter speeds. Fast autofocusing is problematic under some

    I cannot believe I am going to recommend this but you may want to look into
    the Sigma/Tamron 18-200 mm digital zooms. They are actually very good
    performers, particularly at the tele end. I needed a light tele lens for a
    trip through Asia last summer and was so disappointed with the Nikon 55-200
    I let a salesman talk me into buying the Sigma. It has a predictable amount
    of distortion at the very widest end/lowest focal length, easily corrected
    in CS2 if you even notice it. Apart from that it is sharp, high contrast,
    low flare and fast focusing. This may work better for pictures of children
    than a technically superior but larger and heavier lens.
    bmoag, Sep 20, 2005
  5. imodan

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    I've heard nothing good about it, and lots of bad.
    I'd go for option 3. Don't be afraid of buying used lenses; it's actually
    a really good idea as long as you know they're in good condition.
    Apparently not. I haven't used it, but those who have are saying it's
    basically crap.
    Yes, and yes.
    Jeremy Nixon, Sep 20, 2005
  6. imodan

    larrylook Guest

    I agree with you for the most part. But I was at a pool party photographing
    my teenagers, and I stood far away to avoid splashes (very active kids) and
    got good pics. The extra reach helps for something like this. Plus the
    kids don't want you right on top of them at that age too.
    larrylook, Sep 20, 2005
  7. imodan

    Proconsul Guest

    bmoag wrote:

    I agree - I bought a Tamron Dii series digital zoom 18-200mm for use with my

    It's an exceptionally good lens which produces sharp, high quality pictures
    with accurate color balance and an absence of imperfections and
    artifacts.....street price ~$350!

    Proconsul, Sep 21, 2005
  8. imodan

    Dick Muldoon Guest

    I've been very happy with the 80-200 AF-S, but I do recommend using a
    monopod at the longer lengths in the woods or in evening/morning light.
    The thing starts out heavy and it gets heavier fast...
    Dick Muldoon, Sep 21, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.