D80 Body Which Lens?

Hello,

I have preordered a Nikon D80 body only. Now I must decide which lens to get. Currently I have none so this would be the only lens I will have for a while.

The sales person suggested the Sigma DG AF 18-200mm @ $549.998 CA

Alternately there is the Nikon 18-70mm @ $430.00 CA

Nikon 18-200mm @ $899.98 CA A bit pricey for me

Any thoughts...

--
morecoffee
http://www.crockerwebdesign.com/
I wish I knew now what I didn't know then.

MC,

I don't know anything about the Sigma lens, although it's a very useful range.

The 18-70 is a very decent lens for the money. It covers a very useful range and can take excellent pictures. I got one with my D70.

When I bought my D200, I was able to pick up an 18-200 a few weeks later. You hear all kinds of stuff about it, and if you're used to shooting $1000+ lenses you might look down on it, but for most photographers, this is an amazing lens giving you tremendous flexibility in a relativley small package. With the extended range and VR, it easily worth twice the 18-70.

Where are you able to buy the 18-200 for $899?

Alan

Allan,

The lens is $899.98 at London Drugs here in Canada. There is however a 3 month wait. Was your 18-200mm a Sigma?

--
morecoffee
http://www.crockerwebdesign.com/
I wish I knew now what I didn't know then.

No, I've the got the Nikon. Really love the VR. I was wondering what the CA meant in your first post. Should have caught on it was Canada. :> )

Here's three shots from the 18-200 at 18mm, 200mm and 29mm in low light (1/10 sec).

This first is Lake Itasca in MN. The small stream that flows out it (not shown) is the Mississippi River. It's only about a foot deep and 15 feet wide at this point!



This is heavily cropped from the original, also in MN.



This is Luray Caverns in VA



Alan

Mistakenly inserted the thumbnail above. This is what I meant to insert.

The 18-200 VR Nikon is very hard to beat.

If you don't go for the 18-200 VR, I will say that the 18-70DX/ED is VERY hard to beat. A few pix:









--
Roger
Huntington Harbour, California
Surf City, USA

'I want to die peacefully, in my sleep, like my Grandfather...'
Not screaming, and in terror, like his passengers...'

Roger,

Those are great pictures! So you would go for the Nikon 18-70mm lens over the Sigma 18-200?

I am still conflicted...

--
morecoffee
http://www.crockerwebdesign.com/
I wish I knew now what I didn't know then.

Tough choice. The Sigma is an OK lens, has really bad CA but other than that, typical for a zoom this large. Keep in mind this is basically an outdoor daylight lens with it's small apeture (f6.3) and lousy for portraits as you won't get the DOF you need for that sort of work. The Nikon is OK but pricy, hard to get and there's been some quality issue with backfocusing but at least if you buy it in the store you can return if it has that problem. While you solve the daylight only issue with VR it still not a wide apeture so shots where you want shallow DOF will be a problem and that lens has lousy bokeh.

Put if price and quality is a consideration, for the same amount of money as the Sigma you can do what I did -

+Nikon 18-70mm - good all around lens, find good ones on ebay for about $200-229. This was the kit lens for the D200, how bad can it be? Even when I travel with my 70-300mm it's rare that I need that much telephoto.

+ Nikon 50mm f1.8 - excellent, very sharp portrait lens with great bokeh and useful for available light photography. Brand new, about $100, paid $50 used at a show. Some used ones are nice because they were made in Japan and have a more solid feel to them.

+ Nikon 70-300mm G - OK lens if used in it's sweet spot of f8-f11, more zoom than you'll probably ever need and you can find them for about $100-120. Paid $89 brand new on ebay but that was luck. With that much telephoto, you will probably only use this lens outdoors in daylight so the small apeture isn't so bad.

Can any 18-200 replace all these, maybe but you won't have F1.8 prime sharp lens, you won't have the reach of the 300mm and you won't have the compactness and lightness of the 18-70mm (the Nikon 18-200 is rather heavy).

morecoffee said:

Roger,

Those are great pictures! So you would go for the Nikon 18-70mm
lens over the Sigma 18-200?

I am still conflicted...

Click to expand...

It all depends whether you need the extra range. The 18-70DX/ED in my opinion is an outrageous bargain for its range ... almost as good as the 17-55 DX F/2.8 (which costs five times as much $) ... it is a superb portrait and landscape lens. The 18-200 (Nikon or Sigma) is very versatile ... you can shoot zoom or wide angle. Pretty cool. But these cost a lot more dough, and have shortcomings. It just depends what you want or need.

I have not used the Sigma 18-200 but I do own the Nikon 18-200VR.

I guess what I am saying is that if you do not need the range past 70, I know of no other lens that has the "bang for the buck" that you get with the 18-70 DX/ED "kit" lens.

--
Roger
Huntington Harbour, California
Surf City, USA

'I want to die peacefully, in my sleep, like my Grandfather...'
Not screaming, and in terror, like his passengers...'

Carl,

Thanks for the reply, I am now leaning towards the 18-70mm lens. I see your point about using specific lenses for a specific purpose. I am at this point just a novice but I do like good sharp pictures. It is more important to me to be able to take good low light shots than to be able to zoom in.

In a bright sunlight situation is it quite easy to take a shot with a 18-200mm zoomed right in without the VR?

Cheers

--
morecoffee
http://www.crockerwebdesign.com/
I wish I knew now what I didn't know then.

Don't buy the Sigma... or if you want to buy, first read the review at photozone.de. They didn't like it too much. And I'd guess that a 200 f/6.3 isn't all that great - 5.6 is already borderline if you want real good AF when the light's not perfect, and 6.3 will probably stretch the limits even more.

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_18200_3563/index.htm

I'd say get the 18-70, and if you need a 200 mm lens, get the 55-200 DX Nikkor. I'm pretty happy with it. Or if your budget is not that constrained, maybe the new 70-300 AF-S DX (available in October, hopefully) suits your needs.

Basil