Looking to buy a new lens for my Nikon D5100 . . . advice needed

[Kathy O]

I am looking to buy another lens for my Nikon D5100, I currently have a 18-55mm lens. I am looking at getting a 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR lens. I like to shoot landscape shots and was wondering if I am on the right track by looking at this lens. There are alot of times when I can not get as close to the object that I am shooting as I would like to with my current lens. Thanks for your input, it is greatly appreciated.

Kathy

[Ryogenetic]

Kathy, I would suggest finding the lowest price prime/105mm+/ zoom. But a word of caution, I have purchased 3 lenses for my camera, 25mm, 45-150, 42-200 can you guess what lens I use the most? My kit 14-45. Granted most of my photos could be considered portraits. IMHO

Ryo

Mod Note: this post transferred from similar thread in Nature' forum

[jcuknz]

If you do not already have a good firm tripod you will need it with the suggested lens even though it has VR when working at the long end. I don't know the lens but it might make the rig nose heavy so for best result it could be worth while getting a collar for it so you mount the lens on the tripod and the camera hangs on the end creating a balanced rig. If hand holding to capture action you should adopt the rifleman's stature ... holding lens with left hand for good balance.

[Polar01]

Kathy: the weight of the 55-300mm is 8 oz less than my 70-300 so no problem, as jcuknz said with the len being too heavy. I forget does the D5100 have the focusing motor in the camera or does it need a lens with the focus motor in it, that is one thing that will determine what len you can use. Some of the other have more knowledge in those matters than I do. Nice to see you are stepping up and going for a longer reach, you images have improved greatly, since what was it a point and shot, hope to see your shots with a longer len soon.

Cheers:

Allan

[Kathy O]

Kathy: the weight of the 55-300mm is 8 oz less than my 70-300 so no problem as jcuknz said with the len being too heavy. I forget does the D5100 have the focusing motor in the camera or does it need a lens with the focus motor in it, that is one thing that will determine what len you can use. So of the other have more knowledge in those matters than I do. Nice to see you are stepping and going for a longer reach, you images have improved greatly since what was it a point and shot, hope to see your shots with a longer len soon.

Cheers:

Allan

Allan,
My Nikon D5100 does not have a focus motor in it , but if I am not mistaken the 55-300 lens does, if you or anyone else knows anything different than that please let me know, since I am not very knowledgable about all of this yet. Thankyou Allan for the nice comments, I have not had alot of time to get out and shoot anything lately, except my new beautiful grand daughter. I plan on going to the San Juan mountains in Colorado the first week in September, I won't be able to do any hiking so that is why I thought a longer lens might come in handy! Thanks for your input!

Kathy

[jprzybyla]

Hello Kathy, I have that lens. I shoot all my bird images with it. If you get a good copy it performs well, nice detail, good color and contrast. I always shoot with it handheld, with good technique there is no need for a tripod. I have some images posted in the Nature Forum... take a look to see how the lens performs. Look at my post... Birds... A Couple From Yesterday.

[Polar01]

Kathy: did a little looking on the net, you should have not problem with the 55-300mm on that body, if I may suggest I use the 70-300mm which is an excellent len over the past, at least 7 years. It is very fast auto-focusing, that is if something is moving it focuses fast, so it it very good for say sports, or birding, if I try that with my 80-400mm, well lets just say, as I take a lot of landscape shots it's a good thing mountains do not move much and if they did I would be in trouble. It is about a $100.00 more than the 55-300mm, I know that would give you a hole of 15mm between the 18-55mm to the 70-300mm. Just looking into the furture as you might in a year or so want to up grade the 18-55mm to say the 16-85mm, 2mm on the low end can be quite a bit wider and now you have covered over that 15mm hole with an extra 15mm of overlap which sometimes means not changing to the longer len.
Something to give some thought to.

Cheers:

Allan

[Steve S]

Hi kathy. Try here ...........http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/index.php

They give very informative reviews of all lenses.

You are prob looking for a zoom lens, if you like landscapes. 24 - 70 and 70 - 200 are both very sharp lenses, that will cover a very good range of focal lengths.

Mod Note: this post transferred from similar thread in Nature' forum

[Kathy O]

Kathy: did a little looking on the net, you should have not problem with the 55-300mm on that body, if I may suggest I use the 70-300mm which is an excellent len over the past, at least 7 years. It is very fast auto-focusing, that is if something is moving it focuses fast, so it it very good for say sports, or birding, if I try that with my 80-400mm, well lets just say, as I take a lot of landscape shots it's a good thing mountains do not move much and if they did I would be in trouble. It is about a $100.00 more than the 55-300mm, I know that would give you a hole of 15mm between the 18-55mm to the 70-300mm. Just looking into the furture as you might in a year or so want to up grade the 18-55mm to say the 16-85mm, 2mm on the low end can be quite a bit wider and now you have covered over that 15mm hole with an extra 15mm of overlap which sometimes means not changing to the longer len.
Something to give some thought to.

Cheers:

Allan

Thanks for the advice Allan, I will look into the 70-300mm and see what I think.

Kathy

[Kathy O]

Thanks for the advice Allan, I will look into the 70-300mm and see what I think.

Kathy

Allan,
Is this the 70-300 mm lens you are talking about? (Hope the link below works)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search...a&usedSearch=1

Kathy

[Manfred M]

The 55-300mm lens does have a few shortcomings. Like your 18-55mm (which I own as well - I broke the first one I owned - the lens mount broke when my camera bag fell over), it is all-plastic construction, including the lens mount. It is a bit slow on the long end (f/5.6 at 300mm). I own it's "little brother" the 55-200mm lens, and it has the same drawbacks. On the plus side, the lens is super light. If I head off on a hike; I will often just take my D90 with the the 18-55mm and 55-200mm because they are so compact and light, even though I have a D800 and the high-end lenses to go with it.

The 70-300mm lens has a metal mount and is actually a FX (full-frame) lens, so unless you are looking to go to a full-frame camera at some time, you are paying for a larger image circle that you don't need on your D5100; albeit, for a slightly more robust lens.

You are getting into the range where you can start using the lens for some wildlife photography (if it holds still), but I personally like a bit longer focal length, even on a DX camera.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Kathy,

My vote would be for the 70-300mm, which I also own (and yes it is like the one in the link you posted).

I bought it before the 55-300mm was available, if I were buying now? - well I don't know, I haven't used one, so shouldn't comment, but I do tend hold a belief that a robust lens is better than a plastic one and that an FX lens on a DX camera is going to give better edge quality than a DX lens on a DX body and I'd rather pay the extra for that (and I'm fortunate enough to be able to).

That said, as Manfred notes, there are (many) times when 300mm, equivalent to 450mm on FX, just isn't long enough and I just bought a Nikon P510 camera, giving me an equivalent 1000mm, as I cannot justify the price of say, a 600mm (prime telephoto) lens for my D5000.

However, it is still very much a case that;
a) the wildlife needs to keep still - as Manfred delightfully puts it
b) it is slow lens, f/5.9
c) the noise performance isn't as good as the D5000/D5100, so using too high an iso is unwise (I actually limit myself to 400, where as I'll use 800, even 1600, on the D5000)
d) in turn, that means you need sunshine on the subject - and I live in the UK, so that's not very likely!

If all those issues satisfied, it can produce good jpg results, more than equal to cropping the D5000 down to half size.

Of course, it could be argued that the lens on the P510 is even smaller, cheaper and more plasticky than any kit lens, the 55-200 or the 55-300

Hope that helps,

[Kathy O]

Hi Kathy,

My vote would be for the 70-300mm, which I also own (and yes it is like the one in the link you posted).

I bought it before the 55-300mm was available, if I were buying now? - well I don't know, I haven't used one, so shouldn't comment, but I do tend hold a belief that a robust lens is better than a plastic one and that an FX lens on a DX camera is going to give better edge quality than a DX lens on a DX body and I'd rather pay the extra for that (and I'm fortunate enough to be able to).

That said, as Manfred notes, there are (many) times when 300mm, equivalent to 450mm on FX, just isn't long enough and I just bought a Nikon P510 camera, giving me an equivalent 1000mm, as I cannot justify the price of say, a 600mm (prime telephoto) lens for my D5000.

However, it is still very much a case that;
a) the wildlife needs to keep still - as Manfred delightfully puts it
b) it is slow lens, f/5.9
c) the noise performance isn't as good as the D5000/D5100, so using too high an iso is unwise (I actually limit myself to 400, where as I'll use 800, even 1600, on the D5000)
d) in turn, that means you need sunshine on the subject - and I live in the UK, so that's not very likely!

If all those issues satisfied, it can produce good jpg results, more than equal to cropping the D5000 down to half size.

Of course, it could be argued that the lens on the P510 is even smaller, cheaper and more plasticky than any kit lens, the 55-200 or the 55-300

Hope that helps,

Thanks Dave, after doing quite a bit of research and with all the advice on here I am leaning towards the 70-300mm. Thanks again.

Kathy

[Kathy O]

Just ordered my New 70-300mm lens for my Nikon D5100 Camera!! Thanks for all of your advice and comments they were all very helpful!!

Kathy

[Dave Humphries]

Just ordered my New 70-300mm lens for my Nikon D5100 Camera!! Thanks for all of your advice and comments they were all very helpful!!

Congrats Kathy,

I hope you're pleased with it.

How long do you have to wait?

Cheers,

[Kathy O]

Congrats Kathy,

I hope you're pleased with it.

How long do you have to wait?

Cheers,

I should get it by August 16th, which I think is Thursday!