CountryLover957
New member
At the moment I have only a 28-80 and 70-300 lens I am in the process of replacing my 18-55 question is would there be any point getting the 55-200 lens Thanks my camera is the D50
Extra Lenses
- Thread starter CountryLover957
- Start date
Clovishound
Senior Member
Selecting the right lens for you is very much dependent on what kind of shooting you do. If you do a lot of landscape, or work that frequently requires a wide angle, then the 55mm won't do much for you. This is exacerbated by the crop factor since it will put the wide end of this lens into the short telephoto range. Personally, I would be looking more at lenses like the 18-140 or 18-200. All this is predicated on your budget, and shooting style, but you already have 55-200 covered by your other two lenses. Having said that, there is something to be said for a zoom that covers a wide range of focal lengths you shoot most often so you don't have to change lens often, or miss a good shot because you just don't want to change lenses again. Once you decide the zoom range you want and can afford, research the reputation of the lens for it's performance. Some lenses are attractive in the coverage and price, but underdeliver in terms of resolution, durability, and ease of use.
CountryLover957
New member
Thank much appreciated will leave it alone
Bikerbrent
Senior Member
Welcome aboard, enjoy the ride. We look forward to seeing more posts and samples of your work.
You might also want to consider introducing yourself on New Member Introductions.
Clovishound
Senior Member
I guess the first question I should have asked is why do you want to replace the 18-55? I'm not saying you shouldn't, just wondering what about it doesn't suit your needs that something else might. I have that lens with my backup camera, a D3400. It is not a bad lens for what it costs. It was the kit lens that came with most DX cameras. Mine has VR, I believe the earlier version doesn't. It can take sharp photos. It doesn't compare with more expensive lenses, in either sharpness, speed or durability, but it will get the job done. I have considered upgrading my daughter's 18-55 with a faster, sharper lens with a larger zoom ratio lens. Right now, she is happy with what she has, so I will look elsewhere for birthday/Christmas presents for her until she gets the itch for something else. Other lenses I have gotten for her have been FX lenses. That is not a bad strategy for longer focal length lenses. The FX lenses are generally sharper and many are more robust, but are also heavier and more expensive. One big advantage is you will be ready for a full frame body upgrade later down the road, if that is in the cards. Unfortunately, that strategy doesn't work well on the wide angle side because of crop factor. The 24-70 I have on my full frame camera would be the equivalent of 36-105 on a crop frame camera. Great on the longer side, and not so much on the wide. Investing in quality glass is generally considered a sound strategy for building a system.
CountryLover957
New member
Broken and unrepairable
Clovishound
Senior Member
I see from your other post that you are interested in pictures of derelict buildings. While this might not require an extreme wide angle lens, I would think you would likely need at least 28mm full frame, which would be close to the 18mm which you had with your 18-55. I would suggest you see whether you find the 28-80 to be too long for what you want to use it for and go from there. If you were happy with the 18-55 you could replace it relatively inexpensively. I see that KEH has one that is in LN- condition for $68. The 18-55 with VR II is available for a little more. They also have some of the longer zoom ratio lenses available, although they run more. Not sure what you can afford to spend. You might also consider a wide angle zoom, since you have the normal and telephoto range covered.
BF Hammer
Senior Member
@Clovishound He is using a D50, which has to be getting near 20 years old now. Low resolution crop-sensor body. A 28mm lens would be full-frame 42mm equivalent. Not that wide at all.
Later model 18-55mm lenses with vibration-reduction would be my route to go. Sharpness to spare for that older body, and on the used market they are almost giving them away because they are so common. The 55-200mm was the designed compliment for the 18-55mm and are fairly cheap to buy used also. But I think you have the telephoto range well covered already. The 70-300mm lenses I have had were kind of soft though with less contrast than I felt was needed. I really do not know if the 55-200mm would be better in that regard.
Later model 18-55mm lenses with vibration-reduction would be my route to go. Sharpness to spare for that older body, and on the used market they are almost giving them away because they are so common. The 55-200mm was the designed compliment for the 18-55mm and are fairly cheap to buy used also. But I think you have the telephoto range well covered already. The 70-300mm lenses I have had were kind of soft though with less contrast than I felt was needed. I really do not know if the 55-200mm would be better in that regard.
