Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="stix" data-source="post: 119969" data-attributes="member: 12913">Originall posted by fotojack;I've always been told to hold out for better glass. I understand that premise, but also know the reality of budget, and I like to experiment.&nbsp; Between my old Eos and the D3100, I've had a number of inexpensive (cheap) lenses. I haven't lost more than $20 at re-sell, and even made a few bucks on one. I deal ebay alot, so that may not be common. Thats a small risk for the chance to experiment, before spending big money on high quality glass. I've learned alot from having different lenses. Thats knowledge you won't get, waiting until you can afford one lens...that may not be the &quot;rite&quot; one. My 2 cents.&nbsp;I have a Tamron 55-200, a Sigma 70-300 and the 18-55vr Nikon lens. I bought the Tamron first and quickly found I wanted more reach. I was concerned about the gap from 55-70mm, if I sell the 55-200, but am finding I rarely use that range.I don't see much (if any) quality difference between the three. But you hit a good point on handheld, full-zoom shots...it's tough to get crisp shots at 300mm, at slower shutter speeds. VR may help, but I doubt you'll eliminate that issue without faster (ie:expensive) glass. I use a tripod alot so it's not an issue for me, same for the lack of VR.I haven't tested any of them for very fast action yet. But in moderate sun, the Sigma's done well (at full zoom) with the pups playing in the yard.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="stix, post: 119969, member: 12913"] Originall posted by fotojack; I've always been told to hold out for better glass. I understand that premise, but also know the reality of budget, and I like to experiment. Between my old Eos and the D3100, I've had a number of inexpensive (cheap) lenses. I haven't lost more than $20 at re-sell, and even made a few bucks on one. I deal ebay alot, so that may not be common. Thats a small risk for the chance to experiment, before spending big money on high quality glass. I've learned alot from having different lenses. Thats knowledge you won't get, waiting until you can afford one lens...that may not be the "rite" one. My 2 cents. I have a Tamron 55-200, a Sigma 70-300 and the 18-55vr Nikon lens. I bought the Tamron first and quickly found I wanted more reach. I was concerned about the gap from 55-70mm, if I sell the 55-200, but am finding I rarely use that range. I don't see much (if any) quality difference between the three. But you hit a good point on handheld, full-zoom shots...it's tough to get crisp shots at 300mm, at slower shutter speeds. VR may help, but I doubt you'll eliminate that issue without faster (ie:expensive) glass. I use a tripod alot so it's not an issue for me, same for the lack of VR. I haven't tested any of them for very fast action yet. But in moderate sun, the Sigma's done well (at full zoom) with the pups playing in the yard. [/QUOTE]

Verification