Lens Combo Discussion

Hi All,

I have been day dreaming over an interesting lens combo and wanted to see if anyone had experience with either set. I have been shooting on a D5000 for the last 6 months or so and I like the camera and the prime lens I have (50mm f/1.8) despite it's lack of AF on my camera. I am getting frustrated with the 18-55mm kit lens though, and I'm wondering if I want to wait for the quality of the duo lens option below...

Option 1: Super Zoom
Sigma 18-250 F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM
OR
AF-S DX VR Zoom-NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED

Option 2: Combo
Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 IF EX DG HSM
Sigma APO 70-200mm F2.8 II EX DG MACRO HSM

Obviously option 2 is going to be more expensive, heavier, and clumsier... i.e. lens changes.

I'm wondering if I'll miss the 10mm or so on the wide end, and if I'll be willing to compromise the quality for the $$ and hauling.

I'd like to hear any rantings and ravings anyone has for or against any of these lenses. :D

Thanks,

Capt'n Mike

Hi Capt'n Mike,

I started my D5000 experience with your option 1a (exactly), it wasn't wise; let's just say I had significant AF problems. In favourable conditions, the Sigma can produce good results - look for my PBase pictures taken between May 2nd and early September.

I now have option 1b and am fairly happy - still not a perfect lens, but in addition to resolving the AF issues, I believe it also has improved colour contrast over the Sigma.

I think you may well miss the 6/10mm at the wide end though.
I suppose you can stitch to achieve the same result though.

Maybe because I was used to a 10:1 zoom range with my previous Fuji, I prefer not to change the lens unnecessarily.

Cheers,

if you are worried about missing out on the wide angle shots with the second combo, you could consider getting something like an 18-55mm (depening on exactly whats available) instead of the 24-70, you are more likely to miss not being able to shoot in the 18-24mm range than in the 55-70mm range

Hi Mike,

Always think in the long run of where you want to go with your photography. Investing wisely in lenses will carry your photography (from camera body to body) for as long as you so choose to. It is often said that "Camera bodies will come and go. But lenses will last you forever, if properly cared for."

I know it sounds like a lot of money, but think about it. A lens that costed me $1200 and used devotedly for 12 years (and still going); that's only a $100 a year. Wouldn't you say it's worth it?
(Always work and plan your budget).

Please watch this video: http://www.youtube.com/user/jonvideo.../0/T3ceZPInqoA

Mike, I have the Nikon 18-200 VR lens and I cannot fault it.
I use it for most situations when on a walkabout, I use close up filters on it for Macro, I find it wide enough for most landscape photography although I do own a Sigma 10-20mm lens.
Its never going to compete with primes or shorter zoom lenses for outright sharpness but a bit of PP in the sharpening department certainly brings out a good all round performance.
It can be used at a push for a bit of wildlife photography with some cropping in PP, though again I do use a Sigma 150-500mm if I know its only shooting wildlife is that I am going to do.
I have the 18-55 Nikon kit lens which although a tad sharper than the 18-200 and a bit less distortion is not as well built and annoying to use when filters are to be used, no such problems with the 18-200.
The VR works very well, it focuses fast with no hunting in all but very low light, the only annoyance is lens creep when carrying the camera with the lens pointing down if I forget to set it back to 18mm, though I believe the latest Nikon 18-200 lens has a lock on it.
And it is relatively light for a 11 times zoom lens, I use mine on both my D40 and D90.

Keith

I am a Canon guy so I won't be giving advice regarding specific Nikon lenses. In general, however, usually two lenses of shorter focal ranges will beat out a single lens of extreme focal range in the following parameters: image quality (considering that the lenses are very good to excellent quality); autofocus speed and maximum aperture.

On the other hand, some photographers opt to give up a bit of IQ. A/F speed and f/stop for the convenience of having one lens that eliminates lens swapping. However, I eliminate the lens swapping in the field problem by using a pair of camera bodies.

I use a Canon 30D and 40D bodies with 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 70-200mm f/4L IS lenses. This combination gives me very fast autofocus; image stabilization in both lenses; top-notch image quality; f/2.8 in my mid-ranges; and a 17-200mm focal length. BTW: I don't mis the gap between 55mm and 70mm.

Sorry I went a little MIA there. Thank you everyone for contributing advice & opinions!

I haven't made a purchase yet (waiting on that holiday bonus). :rolleyes:
But I believe I am leaning toward the two lens combo. It will take a little while before I can get both, but it's important to have a plan, right?

I agree with both rpcrowe and wjh31... When shooting film I only ever had a 50mm f/1.4, so I adapted my photography to the lens. I would probably miss the wide angle more though. I think I will keep my kit 18-55 lens for now, and get the faster longer lens.

I know Nikon has a similar length lens, but are there any other suggestions as a competitor of the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rpcrowe

BTW: I don't mis the gap between 55mm and 70mm.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wjh31

you are more likely to miss not being able to shoot in the 18-24mm range than in the 55-70mm range

---

Meant that to be in the last post. Technology :rolleyes: