Nikon Lenses

MAYBEN · November 25, 2011

Well folks.. In the near future, I plan to be getting a new lens for my D5000. I have the 18-55 VR and 55-200 VR...

I've been looking at the 18-200 VR II for a while now, and have recently considered the available 28-300 VR II. From what I've read, it takes much sharper images and the only drawbacks were a little more weight and the 18-27 capabilities..

The main reason I will be getting a new lens is because I have lost what could have been perfect shots because I didn't have the right one on at that moment.. We hope to have children soon and I'll be damned if I'm going to miss a shot because I didn't have the right lens on...

I know we have a few DSLR people on here, any comments? Do any of you have the 28-300 lens?

LFairbanks · November 25, 2011

Iam not a Nikon guy, I use Canon. So I really can't give you an opinion. This is where I buy all my photo equipment and there are a ton of reviews on here from people that have bought the lens that your looking at.

SLR Camera Lenses

diver88 · November 25, 2011

if you haven't done so already look up Ken Rockwell's site and see what all he has to say about this lens, I'm guessing he's reviewed it somewhere along the line. it's funny but with all the lenses I own it seems I use my Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 for most everyday stuff cause it's fast, very sharp and has great color reproduction... and also the cheapest.

MAYBEN · November 25, 2011

I've looked at Ken Rockwell's review, he seems to like it.. but does mention

Not for: I wouldn't bother with this on a DX camera. I'd use a DX lens, especially the 18-200mm VR II, instead. For low-light action shots, VR can't help you; shoot a faster fixed lens like the 50mm f/1.4 instead.

Now I'm not sure if he says this because of the pricing difference, or if he is telling people not to upgrade from the 18-200..

I think the 50mm would be a nice lens to get eventually, but I still need a decent zooming capability..

mcss383 · November 25, 2011

Honestly I would go with the 18-200, and I did.

I used it exclusively until I upgraded to the 'pro' level glass and even still I will use it if I can only have 1 lens with me and going to an unknown shooting situation. The only negative thing about it is lens creep. When the camera is angling down the barrel slides out. It is annoying, but not a huge deal. Some people have fixed it by putting a piece of tape on the inner part.

Most of the time you can walk closer to things and if you can't you can always crop. Use that lens until you can save up more money and then step up to better glass if you need it.

diver88 · November 25, 2011

I've looked at Ken Rockwell's review, he seems to like it.. but does mention

Now I'm not sure if he says this because of the pricing difference, or if he is telling people not to upgrade from the 18-200..

I think the 50mm would be a nice lens to get eventually, but I still need a decent zooming capability..

Ken throws a lot of info out and he's very knowledgeable but he sometimes contradicts himself in the next sentence, and he has a reason but he doesn't always get to what it is. I bet he's just shorthanding that with a 28-300mm lens on a DX format that you end up with a 42- 450mm equivelent and he assumes you aren't taking that into account and that the 18-200mm effectively is a 27-300mm on that 5100... and the 200 weighs less (?). following that logic I can only guess that's what he's shooting for in his recommendation. whatever you think fits best what you want to do with the camera but I think the general idea for the big tele's like this is to minimize what you have to carry with you.

for my DX Nikons I use a cheap 50mm f/1.8 Nikkor ($125) , 10-20mm f/3.5 Sigma, 35mm f/1.8 Nikkor, 70-300mm f/3.5-5.6 VRII Nikkor..

that 28-300mm Nikkor looks like a good one, but if you don't want to miss a shot with kids involved I'd suggest a Canon S95 or S100.. this point and shoot has changed what I carry to the point sometimes I don't even take my DSLR's with me.. Canon really has something there.

MAYBEN · November 25, 2011

Honestly I would go with the 18-200, and I did.

I used it exclusively until I upgraded to the 'pro' level glass and even still I will use it if I can only have 1 lens with me and going to an unknown shooting situation. The only negative thing about it is lens creep. When the camera is angling down the barrel slides out. It is annoying, but not a huge deal. Some people have fixed it by putting a piece of tape on the inner part.

Most of the time you can walk closer to things and if you can't you can always crop. Use that lens until you can save up more money and then step up to better glass if you need it.

I've looked around and the price difference I've seen is less than $100. My main objective is to have one main walk around multipurpose lens..

Ken throws a lot of info out and he's very knowledgeable but he sometimes contradicts himself in the next sentence, and he has a reason but he doesn't always get to what it is. I bet he's just shorthanding that with a 28-300mm lens on a DX format that you end up with a 42- 450mm equivelent and he assumes you aren't taking that into account and that the 18-200mm effectively is a 27-300mm on that 5100... and the 200 weighs less (?). following that logic I can only guess that's what he's shooting for in his recommendation. whatever you think fits best what you want to do with the camera but I think the general idea for the big tele's like this is to minimize what you have to carry with you.

for my DX Nikons I use a cheap 50mm f/1.8 Nikkor ($125) , 10-20mm f/3.5 Sigma, 35mm f/1.8 Nikkor, 70-300mm f/3.5-5.6 VRII Nikkor..

that 28-300mm Nikkor looks like a good one, but if you don't want to miss a shot with kids involved I'd suggest a Canon S95 or S100.. this point and shoot has changed what I carry to the point sometimes I don't even take my DSLR's with me.. Canon really has something there.

I still don't understand/haven't really looked into it enough, the measurements that these lenses offer and how they work.. I have a decent point n shoot that I gave to my Wife when I got the D5000, but I still prefer using the DSLR.. I guess we shall see, everything I've seen so far is that the 28-300 give a better picture.. and the only thing I see its missing is the short range, but I imagine its something bearable, versus with the 55-200 lens, I cant take pictures decently close/within a kitchen/living room/etc..

The Ryan · November 25, 2011

I have the D5000 as well, Dylan is a huge Nikon guy and in talking to him I'm going to get the 18-200 when I have the extra coin. I would rather have the closer capability of the lens than the added distance the 28-300 offers. Most of my shots are indoors of my daughter anyways. The 18-200 is really the better fit for me.. It's just coming up with the money for the lens now.

MAYBEN · November 25, 2011

but is the 18-27 difference that much of a loss? that is one of the things I'm trying to figure out..

diver88 · November 25, 2011

but is the 18-27 difference that much of a loss? that is one of the things I'm trying to figure out..

if your outdoors in daylight, do you expect to mainly need to shoot wide angle or taking wildlife pics from farther away? going out on a limb, most casual shooters won't utilize the 300m (450mm crop) as much as you might the wider angle aspects of that 18mm on the short end of the 18-200mm.

have you got a good camera shop close to you? if you go in and ask to "play" with a lens and 5100 you can see what the tele range looks like through your veiwfinder and you will probably be able to make a choice given how you think you'll want to use the camera/lens most of the time.

I say get hands on the 18-200mm, and the 28-300mm and see ..before you spend your money.

LFairbanks · November 26, 2011

Here is an excellent website, and probably a new forum for you...lol.

The below links may help you some.

Search results for "nikon 28-300" at Digital Photography School

Search results for "nikon 18-200" at Digital Photography School

I didn't read through them. I just did a search on those two different lenses the 18-200 and the 28-300.

One thing you will find is that one lens will not do everything that you want. You will need several. I use Canon, and the lens that I use for my general walk around lens is this one. Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM 8014A002

I do have a zoom lens as well and the lens that came with the camera, that I seldom use. I learned before I made the mistake to spend the extra money on a lens and get the lowest f number possible in the lens your wanting. The next lens Iam looking at is a 70-200. Here is an example as to what I was explaining with lower f numbers, but the same lens. I realize that some people may not care. It is just something that I thought I would share with you. canon 70-200

I ran into a guy in Hawaii that took some amazing pictures, and had a photo gallery, here is what he suggested to me for lens'. Again, I know everybody has their own opinion. He used Canon, and therefore these focal lengths are Canon. Iam sure Nikon has something similair if not the same.

16-35 f/2.8

24-70 f/2.8

100 f/2.8 macro Iam thinking however to get the 180.

100-400 f/4.5-5.6

Here is a link to his website. He had some fascinating pictures of the volcano. This was one of my favorites.

Lava CJ Kale - Lava Light Galleries

Lava Light Galleries

Hope this helps.

MAYBEN · November 26, 2011

hmm... now I'm back on the fence...

what a stressful decision..

The Ryan · November 26, 2011

lol.. its always stressful when your spending that kinda coin on a camera lens.

mcss383 · November 26, 2011

For shooting little kids, I believe you will absolutely want wide over tele. You will more often then not be indoors with the kid running toward you or very close when you want to take the picture and that extra bit of wide angle will come in very handy. To get good tele shots at 200mm and beyond in light other than direct sunlight you have to be on a tripod. When I have had my 18-200 or even my 70-200/2.8 on, there are few times I wish I had more zoom. Wildlife photography is one of those few times, but you also need fixed aperture and between 600mm-1000mm.

If you do really get into photography and want a better lens then either the 24-70/2.8 or 70-200/2.8 would be the upgrade points, depending on what you plan on doing with it. I started with the 70-200 because at the time I was doing more wildlife/outdoors or shooting at a race track. Now that I have both of them, I would say the 24-70/2.8 is the better of the two for a first expensive lens because it is the range most used and used in situations with low light and need of a faster shutter speed. YMMV of course, everyone has different needs.

Bunky · November 27, 2011

If you want more objective reviews, check out slrgear dot com.

As said above, if you want good people pics you may find the 18-105 lens to offer a more practical range. The heavier the lens the more difficult to hand hold especially when doing quick action.

For indoors, you really want a shorter range zoom (wide to slight telephoto) with a fast lens (like F2.8). There are rumors of a Nikon 17 to 85 F4 (fixed aperture) hopefully with VR coming out soon.

Bunky · November 27, 2011

If you want more objective reviews, check out slrgear dot com.

As said above, if you want good people pics you may find the 18-105 lens to offer a more practical range. The heavier the lens the more difficult to hand hold especially when doing quick action and I think available light looks more natural than a flash so you need a larger aperture (adds weight too). The best focal length for portraits is 55 mm to 85 mm (on DX format).

For indoors, you really want a shorter range zoom (wide to slight telephoto) with a fast lens (like F2.8). There are rumors of a Nikon 17 to 85 F4 (fixed aperture) hopefully with VR coming out soon.

Meech · November 27, 2011

I have two DX SWM VR ED IF Nikon 18-200's (one is a back-up lens) and are certainly worth every penny. Photography is one of my hobbies, so I have the back up on a back up camera if I'm at a car race or some event switching lenses is not an option.

I recommend this lens, its durable and very versatile!

Meech

MAYBEN · November 27, 2011

I'm still unsure, but leaning back towards the 18-200..

side note: Welcome Demetri! where in NJ are you?

WildBillsBlueC6 · November 27, 2011

I have been following the thread for a while, and asking about the perfect lens is like asking what is the perfect car, there is no perfect answer.

I will put in that I have MANY Nikon lens and pick the one that is best for the results that I am looking for. With that I use the 18-200 VR as my walk around lens (the one that I was using yesterday for the barn find). For walking around I would rather have it a little to wide than to long because you can always crop. With kids running around you have a much better chance of keeping them in the frame with the wide lens.

LFairbanks · November 28, 2011

Here is some more confusion for you. :lol:

Digital Camera Lenses | Nikon Camera Lenses | NIKKOR Optics

Wide Angle Lens | Portrait Lens | People & Events | Nikon

Camera Lenses | All NIKKOR Lenses for Digital SLR Cameras| Nikon

Everybody is going to have their opinion, you just have to figure out what will work for you.

MAYBEN · November 28, 2011

that does confuse me more as both the 18-200 and 28-300 are shown in the wide angle lens/people and event lenses category!

Meech · November 28, 2011

I'm still unsure, but leaning back towards the 18-200..

side note: Welcome Demetri! where in NJ are you?

Work in Hackensack, live in Ridgewood. THanks for the welcome:2thumbs:

MAYBEN · November 28, 2011

small world, I'm in Hawthorne and work in Oakland..

Team Adam's · November 28, 2011

I'm late to the party, but I run my 18-200mm VRII on my D300s about 99% of the time. Its the best all around lens I've ever owned. My D90 belongs to the wife now and its equipped with my 18-200mm VRI... that should tell you how much I like this lens

MAYBEN · November 28, 2011

I'm sure I'll be happy with the 18-200 VR II, but I'm just not sure if I should spend within $100 more and get the extra range, but lose out on the 18-27mm capabilities..

But since I'm more worried about being able to take shots up close in the house, then that may be the solution right there, and lose out on the 200-300 capability...

Sign In

Nikon Lenses

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Archived