| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/28/2014 01:54:59 PM · #1 |
Hey all
Well was out shooting airborne critters this weekend and though I did get to really know and appreciate the quality of my 70-200mm f2.8....I did find myself really, really, REALLY missing the wide end of the old warhorse, my 18-200mm.
I did try to rectify the wide end problem by bringing along the 10-20mm Siggy. But, that meant I had to make some hellishly fast lens swap-outs in order to try and get the shots I wanted. All I can say is thank gawd it wasn't dry and dusty this weekend!!!
So these are my options, and I'd like feedback, and if anyone has lens suggestions please feel free to make them
Option a) try and get the 18-200mm's AF motor fixed, provided it doesn't cost a lot (harhar but I'm an optimist). I would get a local camera store to do it, not Nikon;
Option b) I don't really want to buy another lens, but thinking of an 18-105mm Sigma, possibly a refurb; I think it's a 3.5-5.6....though the Sigs usually do have some CA going on in contrasty areas. |
|
|
|
07/28/2014 01:59:45 PM · #2 |
| I have the Tamron 18-270mm...Auto-Focus etc...and I think they are running a rebate until the end of this month (tick-tock)...it's a fabulous lens and has become my walkabout and I often use it for my birding...unless I need that "little bit more distance" of my 70-300mm. Super sharp, lightweight and quick (not like an f/2.8 or some such...but it's quick to focus on moving targets)... |
|
|
|
07/28/2014 02:22:59 PM · #3 |
So far for me, after nearly three years of shooting with the D7000, the 55-300 ED VR S seems to be the go-to lens in my kit for shooting on the move, and hand held birding and critter shooting.
The 55 end is just wide enough when the subject is coming close to you, and the long end would be a big jump longer than the 18-200. The VR and focusing are quick and right. There is very little CA that I can tell in my photos, though it may be more evident in the higher pixel D7100.
The 55-300 is an inexpensive lens, but seems to be a great value for the price. Some of them are under $250 new if you shop around.
The one I use is pretty well worn now, since it gets hauled around everywhere I go, and is used for about 1/3 of my shooting. I am thinking about getting another one soon, before this one wears completely out.
I also have the 70-300 D, and find that there is a big difference in focus speed, and in the angle available at the wide end, plus the 55-300 will focus to about 5 ft at 300mm so it's good for things smaller than your hand like butterflies for instance.
ETA, for flying critters, AFA, 9 point metering seems to be the quickest for focusing. AFC is good if the birds are moving toward or away from you, but uses more battery power and seems to take a little longer to lock on.
Also be aware that VR takes about 1/2 second to spool up and lock in if you begin your half press of the shutter after you have the subject in your viewfinder. You may want to try the half press while you are swinging the camera into position to frame the shot, which will help with that.
Message edited by author 2014-07-28 14:28:54. |
|
|
|
07/28/2014 02:32:40 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
Option b) I don't really want to buy another lens, but thinking of an 18-105mm Sigma, possibly a refurb; I think it's a 3.5-5.6....though the Sigs usually do have some CA going on in contrasty areas. |
I've been long since out of the buying world, but I would think you could get a cheap Nikon 18-105 or 18-135, because they're kit lenses. Surely someone out there has to be selling one for cheap. The 18-135 doesn't get great reviews, but I've always liked mine (when I can steal it off my husband's camera). |
|
|
|
07/28/2014 02:35:02 PM · #5 |
sounds like you need a second body...
|
|
|
|
07/28/2014 02:36:52 PM · #6 |
I love my 18-200, so don't get me wrong, but here's an alternative tact to think about:
Buy a Lumix FZ1000 for $899. Then you have a sharper, F2.8-F4, 24-400mm lens...and a good sensor, especially for outdoor shooting but can shoot to 3200 pretty readily. Plus you get GREAT video...and can even use the viewfinder for video, unlike the D7100.
Weight: about the same as the 18-200, but you get a second camera in your bag. It's even wider. Better stabilization. It's a LEICA.
PLUS, you get to: Keep your longer (or wider) lens on your D7100. No need to change lenses!
The downside is the smaller sensor, and a different camera to learn. But it's a 1" sensor from Sony. Personally, I find the Sony sensor is only one stop or so noisier than my D7100. And the F2.8-F4.0 aperture more than takes care of that.
I have one on order...there's a waiting list...hopefully it will ship soon.
ETA: Ooh...just got an email...expected delivery Friday!
Message edited by author 2014-07-28 16:38:27. |
|
|
|
07/28/2014 06:17:10 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by Mike:
sounds like you need a second body... |
Yeah, that's an option too, though honestly I don't want to have a second body hanging off of me. That was pretty much the only time I tried that route with swapping lenses with seconds to spare. I didn't like doing it all that much, though it did work. All it just made me yearn all the more for the 18-200!!
Also, thanks for the suggestions re a 55-300 and similar focal lengths, but I do have the Nikkor 300mm f.4 so don't need to replicate that length.
I already have: a 50mm f.1.4, 10-20mm 3.5-5.6, both Sigmas, and the new kid is the 70-200mm f.2.8. Don't get me wrong, I'm VERY happy with the 70-200mm, but got frustrated when the critters got too close. BTW they weren't birds!
Hell, this  was shot at 18mm with that ol' warhorse 18-200mm lens.   These pics, in addition to the other shot here, are on my homepage for a good reason. First, they feature that electric little bareback bronc, Heavy Shot - and they represent the kinds of shots that I didn't get this weekend :-(
Message edited by author 2014-07-28 20:46:10. |
|
|
|
07/28/2014 07:55:26 PM · #8 |
The 18-105 is a good lens too. VR is excellent with it. It was the other kit lens with the D7000, so they should be out there and easy to find.
The old manual 85mm f 1.8 Nikkor is the one I like for nighttime rodeo shooting. I can see good with it and with a monopod it makes following the action pretty easy, plus gives me good shutter speeds at medium iso's. |
|
|
|
07/28/2014 08:00:02 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by MelonMusketeer:
The 18-105 is a good lens too. VR is excellent with it. It was the other kit lens with the D7000, so they should be out there and easy to find.
The old manual 85mm f 1.8 Nikkor is the one I like for nighttime rodeo shooting. I can see good with it and with a monopod it makes following the action pretty easy, plus gives me good shutter speeds at medium iso's. |
Actually, I have one of these I bought with the intention of selling it (part of my D7000 kit). But I never did, and I never used it because I had the 18-200 (and then later that AND the 28-300). Yes, it's been on the camera to test it, but it's otherwise new. Susan, if you are interested in that lens, let me know via PM and maybe we can work it out.
|
|
|
|
07/28/2014 08:39:18 PM · #10 |
PM sent,  Neil.
Trust me, I am not crazy, and that 70-200mm is great, it gives me damn fine shots of the ropers, racers, and so on. But for the roughstock, I get right up to the fence and use that wide end to full advantage. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/06/2025 02:21:40 PM EDT.
