Lens conundrum

G

gqtuazon

Gear Head
Whiskeyman said:
At least that's what I've told my wife, who has also trained me to believe that she needs three rooms of our home for her quilting and sewing.:)
WM
Click to expand...

That's funny! I guess we all have our own battle to fight (I normally lose). IT's bags and shoes in my house hold. Whenever my wife ask me why I have too many lenses, I simply tell her that it is similar to why she has to have so many bags and shoes. The argument usually stops after that. LOL!
 
Last edited:
R

Rick M

Senior Member
gqtuazon said:
That's funny! I guess we all have our own battle to fight (I normally lose). IT's bags and shoes in my house hold. Whenever my wife ask me why I have too many lenses, I simply tell her that it is similar to why she has to have so many bags and shoes. The argument usually stops after that. LOL!
Click to expand...

Yes, but at least when we pull out a body, we usually have a lens to go with it. When my wife pulls out last spring's purse, none of her 50 pairs of shoes go with it, not even the ones that worked last year! My lenses go with everything I own and always will! :)
 
M

Mike D90

Senior Member
So I added the 35-105mm D lens and I love it. I now have that lens, the 18-55mm DX lens and the 55-200mm ED VR lens.

I have checked all over and the 55-200mm lens just doens't have much resale value. Maybe even less than the 18-55mm would have. So I guess I may keep it.

So that leaves me wanting something with reach.

Would you advise getting a zoom lens up to a 400mm length or try to find something fixed?

I am salivating for the Nikon 400mm f2.8 but that will never happen.

I would love to have the Nikon 80-400mm but am not sure I need that much zoom if I am keeping my 55-200mm.

Is there a suggested cheaper alternative in maybe Sigma or Tamron in the 300-400mm range?
 
M

Mike D90

Senior Member
Bill16 said:
The nikkor 70-300 AF is good and can often be for pretty cheap used. I really like mine on my d90! :D
Click to expand...

I have thought about that but I wonder if 300mm is really worth spending money on since I have a 200mm? Is another 100mm reach worth buying or should I save and go to 400mm?
 
Last edited:
B

Bill16

Senior Member
I can't say for certain, and a good 400mm would be great to have. But I can't complain about the 70-300mm's ability to get some pretty great shots.
Mike d90 said:
I have thought about that but I wonder if 300mm is rally worth spending money on since I have a 200mm? Is another 100mm reach worth buying or should I save and go to 400mm?
Click to expand...
 
M

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
There are three main line long zooms in the sigma range,120-400,150-500,50-500,the best is supposed to be the 50-500,next the 150-500 then mine 120-400.my decision was made on price and if i thought i would be able to hand hold even with optical stabilizing,ime happy with my decision the extra weight and focal length of the 500 would not have worked for me hand holding.
To be honest i don't see a 300mm being long enough without some serious cropping or you getting very close,obviously it would be better than a 200 its just how much is guess work,there are some of the older long tamrons come up occasionally i think 200-500 but i have no idea if they are any good,they may not be auto-focus,tokina make a 80-400 but no VR on it.
 
M

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
To give you an idea of the extent of cropping even 400mm requires sometimes,i took this just to practice cropping.

DSC_3900m.jpg


DSC_3900.jpg
 
SkvLTD

SkvLTD

Senior Member
Weren't DX lenses optimized for the DX sensor size or...? I certainly noticed something to that effect on 18-70, but the 35 1.8 indeed is a 50mm equivalent. Bloody Nikon needs to properly label their lenses and their focal lengths.
 
M

Mike D90

Senior Member
Here is a quote from NikonUSA page on DX/FX lenses:

Nikon digital SLRs have either an FX or a DX sensor. The FX sensor, measuring 24x36mm, is roughly equivalent to the size of the 35mm film frame. The DX sensor is smaller, measuring 15.8x23.6mm.

DX-NIKKOR lenses are engineered and optimized for use on Nikon DX-format D-SLRs and are designed to cover the smaller image area of the DX sensor. When a DX lens is mounted on an FX-format Nikon D-SLR, the camera’s DX-Crop Mode is automatically engaged, introducing a 1.5x magnification (cropping) factor.
Nikon digital SLR cameras that utilize the DX-format imaging sensor are designed as smaller camera bodies than those utilizing the larger FX-format sensor. Therefore, DX-format NIKKOR lenses can be made smaller as well. Because fewer materials are used, these lenses are less costly to produce.
The FX/35mm lenses are designed for use on Nikon digital SLR cameras that utilize the FX-format or 35mm full frame imaging sensor.
Click to expand...
 
Marcel

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
SkvLTD said:
Weren't DX lenses optimized for the DX sensor size or...? I certainly noticed something to that effect on 18-70, but the 35 1.8 indeed is a 50mm equivalent. Bloody Nikon needs to properly label their lenses and their focal lengths.
Click to expand...

And you need to go back to your physics books under the optical and lens chapter. A 35mm lens is a 35mm lens, period. There is no other way Nikon could have labeled it. Have a look at other brands offering APS format and you'll see they have the same denominations for their DX lenses.
 
M

Mike D90

Senior Member
The 70-300mm ED VR has been "purchased". I have 14 days to pay and will probably need most all of that. Got a bunch of stuff for sale on eBay and Craigslist to supplement the funds. Cannot wait to get this in my hands!
 
M

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
Mike d90 said:
The 70-300mm ED VR has been "purchased". I have 14 days to pay and will probably need most all of that. Got a bunch of stuff for sale on eBay and Craigslist to supplement the funds. Cannot wait to get this in my hands!
Click to expand...

Mike you dont know how pleased i am to read this,you have already shown your determination now you will have a lens to back it up,congratulations
 
Top