Which lens

K

kiddo007

New member
I am new to dslr and I have recently bought D5100 with the kit 18-55 lens. I am looking to buy a longer range lens. As an amateur with interest I have to decide which one to go for, so would appreciate your help. I am going to be using my dslr mostly on holidays [with kids].
My question is whether to go for a single lens [18-300mm] and add an extra lens [55/70-300mm] to the kit lens. Of course I would prefer to carry just one lens and not worry about changing lenses on a crowded holiday spot. But how much of a compromise is the long range lens picture quality compared to two lenses.:sneakiness:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
G

gqtuazon

Gear Head
The kit lens requires more light when shooting indoor. f2.8 will be a better answer depending your budget such as the Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 DX lens. For more reach, the Nikon 18-105mm f3.5-5.6 VR or for a little more money, the Nikon 16-85mm f3.5-5.6 VR will be your ideal all around lens. I would strongly suggest getting a speed light such as the Nikon SB 700. You'll see a bigger improvement with your pictures once you add more light.

In most cases for beginner photographers, the super zoom lenses that goes up to 300mm are seldom used unlike the lenses that I've mentioned above.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

Dave_W

The Dude
If reach is what you're looking for, I'd strongly suggest the 70-300mm VR-II lens. It's an excellent lens for the price. I would also advise you to avoid the 18-300. These "all-in-one" lenses do a lot of things poorly and are prone to a variety of optical aberrations.
 
Last edited:
T

TedG954

Senior Member
The suggestions above are excellent. As a D5100 user, I have my kit 18-55 on the camera 100X more than my 35 prime, or 55-200MM telephoto.

If money is no object, then the 18-300 would be ideal for me. I have just not found a justification for the added expense.

The kit 18-55mm does an excellent job and it is respected in every review I've found.
 
R

Rick M

Senior Member
All of the above are good advice. I'll add that the 16-85 is one of the best lenses I've owned for a Dx. Those extra 2mm on the wide end come in handy with the crop factor.
 
C

Carroll

Senior Member
I have the 18-55 kit lens, 35-1.8, and 55-300 for my 5100.

Like Ted, I use my 18-55 the most, next would be the 55-300, and then the 35-1.8.

Each take excellent images.

The 55-300 has to "hunt" once in a while at long ranges (200-300mm), and is slow there for AF. I understand that the 70-300 is much faster AF, and is better if you are going to shoot moving targets...sports, politicians, etc.

I was a tightwad, and bought the 55-300. For the small difference, if I knew then, what I know now, I would have went for the 70-300. This does not take away from the wonderful images I get with my 55-300, it is just that for moving subjects, the 70-300 wins.

Having said that, for sports there are probably better (and more expensive) lens.

I will not get rid of my 18-55 or 35-1.8, I like them a lot, as well as the tele.

With DX, our lens range is more limited for DX-specific lens than FX is.
 
K

kiddo007

New member
Thank you very much for all your replies. The options I have narrowed down to are
1. Tamron 70-300, £90 [I don't think this has vibration reduction - how much of a problem is this?]
2. Nikon 55-200, £150
3. Nikon 55-300, £200
I can only buy one of these, as beginer which one do you guys think I should go for.
 
C

Carroll

Senior Member
kiddo007 said:
Thank you very much for all your replies. The options I have narrowed down to are
1. Tamron 70-300, £90 [I don't think this has vibration reduction - how much of a problem is this?]
2. Nikon 55-200, £150
3. Nikon 55-300, £200
I can only buy one of these, as beginer which one do you guys think I should go for.
Click to expand...



I don't know anything about Tamron. (I do know that Vibration Reduction is great with a tele).

For a 70-300 I would go with a Nikon lens, with VR. (Adorama had it today at 586.95 US dollars, new, with 2% rewards)

I vote for the Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR DX lens. I know it is a winner, with known (slight) weakneses. (Adorama has it today for 396.95 US dollars, new, with 2% rewards)

If you could come up with the extra cost for the Nikon AF-S 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR Nikkor, even save for a while til you had it, I think you would be glad you did.
 
§

§am

Senior Member
The VR certainly helps reduce shaky/blurry pics at longer focal lengths.

Not sure about Tamron lenses, but have a look at their website, it'll have a break down of what features are on the lenses ;)

Have you factored in a prime lens too yet? They're a godsend for great pics when indoors as you can often get away with no flash :)
 
Top