Which Lens is best?

[Caroleen]

I was wanting to get a telephoto lens for my D80. I've looked at so many I'm just a litte confused. What is the opinion of 80-200 f/3.5 or a 70-200 f/2.8 ? Also, there is the 18-200MM F3.5-5.6DX VR NIKON LENS
Which would you choose? I can't spend $1700 or anything close to that.
What's everyone think? Would you ever consider buying on Ebay?

[ShawnKing]

Which would you choose?
I'd go with the one with the lowest F/Stop.
Would you ever consider buying on Ebay?
Never for lenses. I'd rather buy in person or from someone who will give me a no questions asked, money back guarantee.

Have you considered renting lenses to see which one you you might like better?

[Whiplash-GT]

if i was choosing i'd personally go for the 70-200 2.8 VR
high quality optics and it has the speed i need for what i shoot

second would be the 80-200, but again i'd opt for the 2.8 version
not as good optically and no VR but again, the speed is there :)
(i couldn't find a f3.5??)

last choice for me would be the 18-200 VR
i don't think the quality is there compared to the other 2 lenses
of course you could end up with a miracle lens like my wife did with the 18-135 :D

[Caroleen]

I also have the 18-135 lens that came with the kit but I don't really like it . My photos are not very sharp.
What about Sigma lenses? They also have the 70-200 f/2.8 for about half the price but it doesn't have VR?

[Not4wood]

I also have the kit 18-135mm zoom and I dont have a problem with sharpness. Yet..
I have heard that the Sigma and Tamoron are not bad and a lot cheaper then the Nikon. Each company has there own designation for Image Stability and I don't have a clue which lens for the third party companies have or not have it.

I have the D80 and am starting to look for a telephoto as well but I was thinking of either going for the 300mm or even up to the 400mm zoom. But these are very expensive and I'm not really interested in spending thousands for a new lens. If I were going for another lens I would get the fastest I could afford and that means to me anything more then the f:4 lens. f3.5 or better yet the 2.8. The 2.8 I think it was the Nikon 200-400 was a couple of thousand.

I just searched out B&H for the Sigma 3.5 18-200 zoom Non VR http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/373748-REG/Sigma_777306_18_200mm_f_3_5_6_3_DC_Lens.html

This is the HSM Lens for Autofocus for Nikon Digital: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/538309-USA/Sigma_77D_306_18_200mm_f_3_5_6_3_II_DC.html

This is the Optical Stabilizer, and Autofocus: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/485229-REG/Sigma_888_306_18_200mm_f_3_5_6_3_DC_OS.html

--
This is what I'm interested in:

Sigma 100-300 Auto Focus and Optical Stab. http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/253092100.htm

Nikon 400 2.8 VR: http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/541531281.htm

This is what I'm drooling over and can't afford.. If I would win the Lottery, yup without a doubt. LOL
Nikon 200-400 f4 VR: http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/541538799.htm

[Caroleen]

Yes, I have my wish list, too. I would love to have the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR but it sells for $1700 and up. I have to settle for less.
Mark, your gallery is beautiful. I wish on this forum that we listed the aperatures and shutter speeds that we take the photos with. It would help us that are learning.

[Not4wood]

Yes, I have my wish list, too. I would love to have the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR but it sells for $1700 and up. I have to settle for less.
Mark, your gallery is beautiful. I wish on this forum that we listed the aperatures and shutter speeds that we take the photos with. It would help us that are learning.

First, thank you.
Now, any shot on the whole board as well as mine. We will be happy to post any information about it that you want. Not a problem. If I remember, usually I do post my Exif Data.

Also, most of my shots I have posted are not from my D80. I only purchased my D80 right before Thanksgiving and only have a couple of shots. All of my vacation shots are from the Canon P&S. I will be using my D80 for my first Digital Portraits very soon and I'm looking forward in trying it out. I will be using my 283, using the slow shutter technique and to just practice my old poses floating in my head. LOL Thats if I can remember them. Hopefully these people will be able to help and pose each other as well.

[epaul6]

I have several lenses for my Nikon D70 but the one that I find the most practical is the 18-200 VR. It is not 2.8 but for city traveling and indoor shots with an SB 800 you can't go wrong. Honestly it is on my camera almost all the time. I also have a macro lens, 100MM Tokina, and a longer telephoto an 80-400 Tokina. I need to use a tripod for macro or long telephoto shots so VR is not the issue. The 18-200 replaced a 24-120 vr which to me is not as sharp and not wide or long enough. Everyone I know loves the 18-200.

[lexcell]

Caroleen,
It really depends on what subject you like to photograph. A faster lens is great for hand holding in lower light and/or stopping action. The 70-200mm 2.8 VR is a fantastic lens but, yes it is around $1700.00.

I recently purchased the Nikon 70-300mm 4-5.6 VR as a smaller, lighter, longer lens to use when I am out and am not carrying all my equipment with me and it is a very nice lens. It is not as fast as a 2.8 lens but it is sharp and has even greater reach than the 70-200mm

If you need the speed of a 2.8 lens, Sigma has a nice one for a reasonable price...70-200mm 2.8 II EX DG HSM. This lens is for the smaller sensors so, if you were to upgrade to a full frame sensor one day it would not be fully compatible and it does not have VR.

My first choice for lenses and accessories is always the manufacturer of my camera but, the budget does not always allow that and Sigma or Tamron make excellent lenses.

[TonyW]

And if you don't need VR (although I have it and it does help) take a look at the Nikkor 70-300mm 4.5-5.6G. Reputably a fine lens and an absolute steal at $125 from B&H

Tony

[richardallen]

I purchased the nikon 70-200 2.8 and love it, i also have other 2.8 lenses. but the most important think to remember is that after you buy it the resale goes down to zip. If you buy a 1700.00 dollar lense plan to keep it.

[Biglug]

I purchased the Nikon 17-55mm 2.8 and it almost never leaves my camera.

[Not4wood]

I purchased the nikon 70-200 2.8 and love it, i also have other 2.8 lenses. but the most important think to remember is that after you buy it the resale goes down to zip. If you buy a 1700.00 dollar lense plan to keep it.

I dont know about prices dropping for lenses. There still valuable as long as there in good condition. Look at Ebay with all the lenses for sale. Yup, there cheaper but there all still in high demand. Nothing, and I'm sure I can almost say this a pure 100%, can you tell me something that remains the actual purchase price after lets say 2-3 years?? Even the Realestate Market is so volatile that a price for a house or even a neighborhood does change depending on the market. Sometimes up, sometimes down. Right now its down but from I've seen in my very short life it goes in cycles.

Why would you buy a lens to sell it at a later date? An apartment or house I can see but a lens??

[Chuck S.]

Why would you buy a lens to sell it at a later date? An apartment or house I can see but a lens??

Trading up....just like a house....:)

[Whiplash-GT]

for a good quality "brand name" lens i don't see you losing any more than 20% if you take care of your stuff
i see tons of the top Nikon's going for cost as new, you just save on the taxes :) even the better quality bodies hold their value well

[Caroleen]

Found this website today to check out the lens.


http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/index.php/cat/1

Caroleen

[epaul6]

If you buy "good glass" you will probably keep the lenses but replace the body as technology improves.

[Caroleen]

epaul6, I notice that you have the Tokina lens, do you like them? What is their quality compared to Sigma or Nikon? Do you know? Which zoom lens do you like the best? I only have the kit lens 18-135 mm and am looking for a telephoto zoom lens. Can't afford the 70-200 VR at $1700. and don't feel I'm good enough anyway to have something like that. Thanks for your response.

[lowbone]

Some things to consider. Will you be travelling? Will you be walking allot? The f 2.8 lens weighs in at over three pounds. Add the weight of the camera and you will really notice it on your neck. The 18-200 is lighter and smaller but it is a 10X zoom and that is really asking allot from a lens. The overall quality will be good but not as good as the 70-200 f 2.8 lens. You mention portraits. f 2.8 will give you some nice bokeh ( background blur ). Do you plan to shoot sports or for that matter anything that moves where the light is not great? If so, you definitely want the faster lens. I consider IS or VR extremely valuable and would not consider a lens of this focal length without it. Another thought is that you can add a 1.4 teleconverter to the 70-200 without much image degradation and your maximum aperture is still f 5.6 so you retain AF. Do you want to be unobtrusive? The big f 2.8 says " look at me " whereas the 18-200 is smaller and not as likely to be noticed. I know that this is very confusing but there is no lens that will do it all. You will have to figure this out yourself. Don't ever let someone talk you into a lens. Everyone has different standards and one persons dream lens is another persons nightmare. Good luck on whichever lens you choose.

[epaul6]

Caroleen

Tokina is the smallest of the known third party lens makers and was started by some former engineers from Nikon. I am happy with the Tokina macro it is a fast, full frame f2.8 lens and is built like a tank with a metal body. You switch from manual to auto-focus by sliding the focus ring forward or back. It has a focus limiter switch which prevents it from going into macro mode therby speeding up focus when using as a portrait lens. Note that it is not a VR or an AF-s lens meaning that the motor in the camera drives the focus mechanism. If you have a D40 or D40x it won't auto-focus because those cameras do not have motors in the body. The lens is very sharp. I use a tripod when in macro mode so vr is not an issue (wind is a big issue).

The 80-400 is small for its reach. It also uses the camera body to drive the focus so it is slower than an AF-S lens. I always use the tripod for it also. If you need manual focus you need to move the switch on the camera body to the M position.

I am just a dabbler-most of my shots are of family, friends or walk around vacation shots. They are for my own amusement.

Now as for a zoom lens. I love my 18-200 vr. If is light and fast, focuses at a minimum of about 2 feet. It is very sharp. The vr is about the best there is at a rated 4 stops. It is on my camera about 90% of the time. My issue with the 70-200 vr is cost and weight. It is a big heavy full frame lens. However I believed it is the most beloved lens Nikon makes. The image quality is from all I have heard spectacular.

The Tokina lenses are specialty lenses that frankly don't get the use commiserate with what I paid for them. In hindsight I should have bought those lenses used.

Lastly I have always heard that you should buy "good glass" because you can replace the camera body and the lenses will still yield excellent results.