# Lets talk lenses(Nikon D5000)



## Alan92RTTT (Apr 9, 2010)

I currently have the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor and the 55-200mm f4-5.6G ED AF-S DX Nikkor Zoom

These lenses do a good job for what they are but they are giving me some frustration.

Coming from a Canon IS S@ with a 500mm equivalent the 200mm is short.

Switching when out shooting is a pain and the 55mm point seems to be at a line where I feel the need to do it more than I'd like. 

I've looked at the Nikon 18-200 but its not cheap. I've been looking into the 18-105 and maybe a 70-300 but thats not cheap either. 

What lenses would you guys suggest that would help without putting me into debt?


----------



## Rosshole (Apr 9, 2010)

the Tamron 70-300 is what I have and it's $165 on b&h.  Sigma also makes one, but I am not sure of the pricing on it.


----------



## KmH (Apr 9, 2010)

Alan92RTTT said:


> I currently have the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor and the 55-200mm f4-5.6G ED AF-S DX Nikkor Zoom
> 
> These lenses do a good job for what they are but they are giving me some frustration.
> 
> ...


Actually the 18-200 (worst value in Nikons lens lineup) and the 70-300 (one of the best values in Nikons lens lineup) are inexpensive lenses. It's relative to your budget though.


Many Nikon shooters aspire to owning the Nikon Trinity, the:

AF-S 14-24 mm f/2.8G ($1800, new) Nikon | AF-S Zoom Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF Lens | 2163 | B&H
AF-S 24-70 mm f/2.8G ($1740, new) Nikon | AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Autofocus Lens | 2164
AF-S 70-200 mm f/2.5G VRII ($2300, new) Nikon | AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Lens | 2185 | B&H
I would sell the 55-200 and apply the proceeds to the 70-300.

Otherwise, you need to look to 3rd party glass. Sigma makes a 150-500 mm zoom that is only $999. 


They recently announced the new 50-500 mm with OS (=Nikon VR) for $1400.

Nikon's 200-400mm is only $6100.


----------



## gsgary (Apr 9, 2010)

Alan92RTTT said:


> I currently have the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor and the 55-200mm f4-5.6G ED AF-S DX Nikkor Zoom
> 
> These lenses do a good job for what they are but they are giving me some frustration.
> 
> ...




Lenses is where the money should be spent because a cheap body with a top quality lens is better than a top quality body with a cheap lens


----------



## Alan92RTTT (Apr 9, 2010)

well I'd live to drop thousands on lenses. But I want to stay married so I'm going to have to keep to lenses costing less then $500-$600.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Apr 9, 2010)

Isn't a little inconvenience cheaper than a new lens?


----------



## Alan92RTTT (Apr 9, 2010)

Yes, but I hate the thought of having to swap lenses in a place that could get crap into the body. (a race track for example)


----------



## Dao (Apr 9, 2010)

If that is the case, you just need to get the superzoom type lens offered by Sigma or Tamron.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Apr 9, 2010)

If there is that much dust in the air, and you do that often, you might want to put a cover over the cheaper lenses that aren't weather sealed. Dust and sand can into them. I have the cheap $200 55-250mm, and it makes a nice grinding sound when zooming. Just something to think about.

I made a nice ripstop nylon bag to change lenses in, for such conditions. :thumbup:


----------



## Vinny (Apr 9, 2010)

I also am trying to remain married!

I bought the 18 - 105 & 70 - 300 when I bought my camera and both seem pretty nice for the money. The 18 - 105 came with the kit and I knew I wanted a longer range zoom. I've been playing around with the smaller zoom more than the larger but the couple of shots I took with the larger one were nice; I also did some online research about them before buying and they both got good writeups.

You mention 500mm on your Canon but not knowing anything about it (film or sensor size) the 300 may fall short.


----------



## KmH (Apr 9, 2010)

Alan92RTTT said:


> Yes, but I hate the thought of having to swap lenses in a place that could get crap into the body. (a race track for example)


The body can easily be cleaned with a rocket blower and there are techniques for changing lenses to minimize the chances of crap getting in.

Tough crowd, huh?


----------



## Alan92RTTT (Apr 9, 2010)

KmH said:


> Though crowd, huh?


No ****, be nice to the noob. 




:greenpbl:

"If that is the case, you just need to get the superzoom type lens offered by Sigma or Tamron. " Did you have any specific ones in mind?


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Apr 9, 2010)

KmH said:


> Though crowd, huh?


 
Speel cheek much? :lmao:


----------



## KmH (Apr 9, 2010)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > Though crowd, huh?
> ...


:gah::gah:Busted!


----------



## Seelow (Apr 9, 2010)

I Have the same d5000 with the same lenses that you have.  I found a really good deal on the Nikon 18-200mm and haven't looked back.  Check around CL and locally  you can get a good deal.  Before I bought that I was looking at the tamron 18-270mm and the sigma 18-250mm there both around ~ $550.  The nikon has a 11x zoom equivalent witch was really nice coming from the 4.3x zoom of the 55-200mm.


----------



## Alan92RTTT (Apr 9, 2010)

hum that 18-270 tamaron looks interesting


----------



## KmH (Apr 10, 2010)

Super zooms, by necessity, are a stacked series of design compromises that all have a negative effect on image quality.

A super zoom is a lens that has a 10x, or more, focal range.

The 18-270mm Tamron is 15x.


----------



## Alan92RTTT (Apr 10, 2010)

I've been reading the reviews on some sites and the tamrom is not looking so good any more. The similar sigma is not looking good either


----------



## quackal (Apr 10, 2010)

Anybody shoot primarily sports with a telephoto zoom?.....I don't have the money for a f/2.8 (I shoot with a Canon XSi), so what is the next best lens out there (100-300 or 100-400 mm)?

I've heard Sigma can have trouble focusing at times which would be a problem shooting sports.

Any suggestions?

thanks!


----------



## Tee (Apr 10, 2010)

Alan92RTTT said:


> I've been reading the reviews on some sites and the tamrom is not looking so good any more. The similar sigma is not looking good either


 
I'm going on a field trip class to the local mini-safari where I live and a rep from Tamron will be there allowing use of various lenses.  I've been reading about lenses as that is the area of my next few purchases.  I'm looking forward to being able to use them before considering purchase.


----------



## Photo Lady (Apr 10, 2010)

wow great thread... i have the same canon and went to the same Nikon.. now i know i am not the only one with this problem.. and now i know what to do about it..thanks


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Apr 10, 2010)

quackal said:


> Anybody shoot primarily sports with a telephoto zoom?.....I don't have the money for a f/2.8 (I shoot with a Canon XSi), so what is the next best lens out there (100-300 or 100-400 mm)?
> 
> I've heard Sigma can have trouble focusing at times which would be a problem shooting sports.
> 
> ...


 
100-400 f/4 IS L $1600


----------



## KmH (Apr 10, 2010)

Sigma 150-500 mm f/5-6.3 APO DG HSM 

Daytime field sports, mostly soccer:







I use a second body with a shorter lens (24-85) mounted for close in shots.


----------



## mrpink (Apr 10, 2010)

I had the exact same problem, or issue.  I went with a Sigma 18-250mm 3.5/6.3 OS for my walk around lens, works quite well.





p!nK


----------



## 1limited92 (Apr 10, 2010)

Let talk about lens baby, lets talk about you and.....sorry had an episode there....continue....:lmao:


----------



## Alan92RTTT (Apr 12, 2010)

Seelow said:


> I Have the same d5000 with the same lenses that you have.  I found a really good deal on the Nikon 18-200mm and haven't looked back.  Check around CL and locally  you can get a good deal.  Before I bought that I was looking at the tamron 18-270mm and the sigma 18-250mm there both around ~ $550.  The nikon has a 11x zoom equivalent witch was really nice coming from the 4.3x zoom of the 55-200mm.



I'm confused. the 55-200 and the 18-200 are both DX series lenses. They should be optically the same(from 55-200).


----------

