Advice on lens selection
- Thread starter lynx1
- Start date
What Rick said and about $400. I own a copy of the non-VR zoom, which can now be purchased for around $60 to $100 but even that is more than I think it's worth. It's soft beyond 200mm, has significant CA and has a very slow auto focus that will be even slower on your camera since the auto-focus will not work on a D3100. The VR version is the only one you should consider.
You do realize that the auto-focus on this lens will not work on your camera so you'll have to manually focus the lens for every shot you take...right?
Rancher_RIP
RIP
Thinking about budget take a look at factory refurbished. When I got my 55-300 I paid $250 with a warranty.
Dave
Dave
Browncoat
Senior Member
1) What exactly is your budget? "Nothing too expensive" isn't very specific. Give us a dollar amount.
2) What are you wanting to use the lens for?
Dave is right...factory refurbs or even other brands (like Tamron) can be a good alternative if you're limited on funds. Some off-brand lenses are utter crap, while others produce results that are just as good as Nikkor for a fraction of the price. But without a number to work with here, we're just shooting in the dark. Toss us a bone.
2) What are you wanting to use the lens for?
Dave is right...factory refurbs or even other brands (like Tamron) can be a good alternative if you're limited on funds. Some off-brand lenses are utter crap, while others produce results that are just as good as Nikkor for a fraction of the price. But without a number to work with here, we're just shooting in the dark. Toss us a bone.
For somewhere around that money you should be able to pick up a used 55-300VR. It will be better than the non-VR 70-300.
I made the mistake of buying a 70-300 D (no VR) , I was very disappointed with it, and ended up buying a new 70-300G VR. It is a great lens, but a little over your set budget.
I made the mistake of buying a 70-300 D (no VR) , I was very disappointed with it, and ended up buying a new 70-300G VR. It is a great lens, but a little over your set budget.
anandpuranik
New member
Well for that price range you can either look for 55-200 dx lens or tamron 70-300 ld di macro lens. The newer version would focus on 3100 but. You would definately regret the purchase soon.
Sent from my GT-P3100 using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my GT-P3100 using Tapatalk 2
Judging from the replies, I may be alone here...
Not long after getting my 1st dslr (Canon XS), I realized another lens or two would be a neccesity.
A year later I sold my Canon stuff and bought a D3100. Back to square one.
I've learned some things, but the same question exists...which lens to buy?
The main issue is...I like to shoot everything; action,landscape,micro,portrait, but I gravitate toward low-light shots; sunrise/sunsets/night skies.
My budget does not allow for the collection of glass needed to cover all the bases. Especially my need for "fast" glass (ie:expensive). I won't be happy until I invest in at least one fast lens, but no idea what focal length would be best, or if I should go with a prime or zoom.
Too many questions, not enough (clear) answers.
I was surprised by all the (cheap) glass, that had good user reviews. Most will not AF on my cam. I shoot all manual 95% of the time, so no big deal. I don't know any way to "test drive" lenses, so I decided to take a chance.
I have 3 lenses; the 18-55 VR kit lens, a Tamron 55-200 DiII and a Sigma 70-300 macro. I have less than $150. in the two non-nikon's, and confident I can re-sell both with minimum loss. I actually made money on the last (non-AF) Tamron I sold.
From what I've read here, most have a very dim view of these lenses. For me, they provide a way to narrow down (exactly) what I want in a lens, without major investment.
In a zoom, I like the reach of 300mm, but most start at 70mm. Will I miss the range of 55-70mm? Judging from my exif data, I don't shoot much in that range...one question down.
So whats my point here??? Google "which lens to buy?" and you're headed for a severe case of info overload!
Many will tell you...invest in good glass, I agree. But now you're facing a huge selection of lenses, minimum cost of $400.-500...minimum! To some of us, thats a chunk of change for a purchase we're not confident on.
My personal experience...these cheap lenses are a great way to experiment without breaking the bank.
I shoot manual and often use a tripod, so I don't miss VR or AF. I've had good experience with re-sell, been surprised by their image quality, have different lenses to play with and can afford to swap gear!
Still undecided on a faster lens, but will continue this course. It seems to be working for me.
* Note to newbies...be careful with your info sources. I've run into (alot) of "equipment snobs". To them, if you aren't using a full frame camera with primo glass and a $400. tripod...you're wasting your time.
I do believe in good equipment, (as with anything) it makes a difference.
I also believe great images CAN be produced on a budget.
...my $.02
Not long after getting my 1st dslr (Canon XS), I realized another lens or two would be a neccesity.
A year later I sold my Canon stuff and bought a D3100. Back to square one.
I've learned some things, but the same question exists...which lens to buy?
The main issue is...I like to shoot everything; action,landscape,micro,portrait, but I gravitate toward low-light shots; sunrise/sunsets/night skies.
My budget does not allow for the collection of glass needed to cover all the bases. Especially my need for "fast" glass (ie:expensive). I won't be happy until I invest in at least one fast lens, but no idea what focal length would be best, or if I should go with a prime or zoom.
Too many questions, not enough (clear) answers.
I was surprised by all the (cheap) glass, that had good user reviews. Most will not AF on my cam. I shoot all manual 95% of the time, so no big deal. I don't know any way to "test drive" lenses, so I decided to take a chance.
I have 3 lenses; the 18-55 VR kit lens, a Tamron 55-200 DiII and a Sigma 70-300 macro. I have less than $150. in the two non-nikon's, and confident I can re-sell both with minimum loss. I actually made money on the last (non-AF) Tamron I sold.
From what I've read here, most have a very dim view of these lenses. For me, they provide a way to narrow down (exactly) what I want in a lens, without major investment.
In a zoom, I like the reach of 300mm, but most start at 70mm. Will I miss the range of 55-70mm? Judging from my exif data, I don't shoot much in that range...one question down.
So whats my point here??? Google "which lens to buy?" and you're headed for a severe case of info overload!
Many will tell you...invest in good glass, I agree. But now you're facing a huge selection of lenses, minimum cost of $400.-500...minimum! To some of us, thats a chunk of change for a purchase we're not confident on.
My personal experience...these cheap lenses are a great way to experiment without breaking the bank.
I shoot manual and often use a tripod, so I don't miss VR or AF. I've had good experience with re-sell, been surprised by their image quality, have different lenses to play with and can afford to swap gear!
Still undecided on a faster lens, but will continue this course. It seems to be working for me.
* Note to newbies...be careful with your info sources. I've run into (alot) of "equipment snobs". To them, if you aren't using a full frame camera with primo glass and a $400. tripod...you're wasting your time.
I do believe in good equipment, (as with anything) it makes a difference.
I also believe great images CAN be produced on a budget.
...my $.02
Last edited: