Need help choosing a new zoom lens

[DelawareJim]

I'm looking at getting a new zoom for Christmas and I'm torn between the Nikkor 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S DX or the Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S ED VR II. They also make a 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S, but I had sticker shock when I saw the price.

I currently have a Nikon D80 body, an 18-55mm and a 55-200mm and find I'm switching lenses a lot and want a little bit further range as well. It'll be used almost exclusively for field work shooting plants, wildlife, and such.

For those who use zooms a lot which do you think would be most practical.

Thanks.
Cheers.
Jim

[gore42]

Hi Jim,

For what it's worth, the more that you increase the zoom range, the worse your image quality is ultimately going to be. I have a Nikkor 18-200 and an 18-135, and the image quality of the cheaper 18-135 is noticeably better, especially when it comes to chromatic aberration and border softness.

When I'm doing photojournalism or event photography and know that I'll need high image quality but don't want to switch between lenses, I've found that the only good option is to carry two camera bodies... one with a wider angle zoom and one with a telephoto, the exact lenses depending on the job.

But if that's not practical, the 55-300 will probably give you better image quality, and obviously a nice telephoto reach

- Matthew Gore

Light and Matter

[DelawareJim]

Thanks for the reply and the link Matt.

After posting the same message on a couple of other boards, and getting a much bigger response btw, I think my basic problem is I'm reaching that point in my photographic development where I'm starting to look at things and think like a more advanced hobbiest but still wanting to spend like a beginner. So the real questions I need to sort out are, how serious do I want to get and am I willing to spend the money?

Cheers.
Jim

[tropterrarium]

Originally Posted by DelawareJim

Thanks for the reply and the link Matt.

After posting the same message on a couple of other boards, and getting a much bigger response btw, I think my basic problem is I'm reaching that point in my photographic development where I'm starting to look at things and think like a more advanced hobbiest but still wanting to spend like a beginner. So the real questions I need to sort out are, how serious do I want to get and am I willing to spend the money?

Cheers.
Jim

Do you think you will get more serious with your hobby? If so, start considering primes. The image quality is superior to any zoom. You can see it in the data-sheets even for top quality fix-focal and zoom lenses (e.g., Zeiss data sheets). Even Zeiss cannot make a zoom that rivals their primes, not even in the sweet spot of the zoom, and it goes downwards from there.

Second, the various zooms have significant overlap in focal ranges. So once you accumulate more than two zooms, you could just as well use well-spaced fix focal lenses to cover the same range. Additionally, you'll get better quality images, and more lightweight or faster lenses.

Last but not least, do you have a decent tripod with head? If not consider getting one. Fortunately, a tripod does not get obsolete, so it is worth-while to invest in a good one. Just used my Gitzo CF with Linhof Profi II today. Bought it about 15 years ago, been several times around the globe, and still works like a charm. The tripod forces me to compose more deliberately, and reduces camera movements, so results in sharp images.

[RobS]

Agreed primes >>>>> zoom.

My favorit lens is my macro 105mm 2.8 Sigma EX. I don't know for Nikkon but in general the Sigma EX series gives very good value for money.

[Discus]

Originally Posted by RobS

Agreed primes >>>>> zoom.

My favorit lens is my macro 105mm 2.8 Sigma EX. I don't know for Nikkon but in general the Sigma EX series gives very good value for money.

I used (and absolutely loved) this lens for years with a Canon film body (50E); when I upgraded to a EOS 5D, it didn't work properly, so I've also got a Canon 100mm Macro lens now. I really really like the images I got out of the Sigma. I'm not sure what's changed, but I don't like the macro shots coming out of my 5D as much. I suspect my camera technique has gotten a lot sloppier (handheld rather than tripod mounted), and I'm using total flash more... :/

With regards to the original question, yes, there does come a time when the consumer-level stuff is a bit limiting and you start looking at the high end & "pro-sumer" level stuff, and getting a bit sad at the prices.

My long lens is a 170-500mm Sigma, which is unreliable on the 5D (setting AP to wide open seems to help), but the camera often locks up. Annoying when shooting wildlife, and in general, a dreadfully slow, crappy lens.

I would dearly love a proper Canon 600mm F/4 IS, but then I could buy a car for that money. Which you'd need to cart the thing around

Primes are obviously and consistently better (at least when compared within a price bracket) than zooms - but sometimes the convenience of a zoom is handy. I usually leave my Canon 24-105mm L lens attached to the body. I rarely change to anything else unless I'm doing macro. I've hardly ever used my 16-35mm L lens.

If you want a really fast lens, the 50mm f1.4 is fantastic.

Generally, most people say that the "big brand" lenses are better than the after market guys. I would expect that would particularly apply to Nikon, who have quite the reputation as lens-makers (I once had the chance to look through the viewfinder of some BBC Wildlife cameraman's video/film camera with some fancy Nikon lens attached and was amazed by the clarity of the image. Of course, when your baseline is a Sigma 170-500...!).

I should probably see about getting the Sigmas re-chipped.

[Connie Star]

Originally Posted by Discus

I would dearly love a proper Canon 600mm F/4 IS, but then I could buy a car for that money. Which you'd need to cart the thing around

[RobS]

Originally Posted by Discus

Generally, most people say that the "big brand" lenses are better than the after market guys.

Probably they are but if you're talking value for money Sigma EX is great and most of us won't see the difference. Sure if you have the cash to spare and really like your fotography or are a perfectionist go for the high end big brand ones.

[BikerDoc5968]

Hi Jim... I currently am using the Nikon D-90 and purchased it with Nikkor 18~55 and 55~300 lenses. I must say my "eye" is not that critical and enjoy using both lenses and feel my pictures are more than adequate for me. For what it's worth, not that this matters but I also only use my camera in manual mode cuz that's just how I learned back in my Nikon F days. These lenses also were great because I had skylite filters and others that fit the 67mm thread. I like the size of the lenses. Since you are covered for the lower end, I'd go with the 55~300 and since it is a DX lens you're going to get some "extra" distance also. Happy shooting and enjoy your new holiday gifts!

[Connie Star]

Hi Jim,
I use Canons, but the same principles apply. Like Matthew Gore said, the more you try to do with any one lens, the more you have to compromise in image quality, weight and money.
I use two zooms, the 18-55mm that came with the camera, and a 75-300mm. I also have two prime macro lenses, a 50mm and a 100mm. It might look like I'm leaving a gap, but I can crop and with the high megapixels of modern cameras it doesn't matter.
I like to shoot birds, and I usually leave the longer zoom on the camera when I'm hiking or birding. Granted, I've been at this for 40+ years so my investment is a little more spread out.
Isn't this fun?