Ordered S5, now what lens should I buy?

Hyniem Nguyen

Well-known member
Messages
109
Reaction score
0
Location
CA
Hi Everyone,

I ordered an S5 from Vistek lastweek. I don't when it will come. Hopefully nextweek. I have Nikon 18-200 lens. I want to have a faster lens, something like 17(or 18) - 50(or 70) mm 2.8. I can't afford Nikkor, so I am looking at Sigma or Tamron. I heard that S5 is ok with some lenses, but not with others. So if you have some experiences with these kind of lenses and range, please give an advice. I do mostly with people.

Thank you in advance.
--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fuji 602z, Nikon D70, Nikon d200
 
Perhaps a sigma 30mm f1.4? Great for low light and a nice perspective on dx. :) Plus it has great image quality. You can also try a nikkor 35mm f2, I believe it's slightly cheaper.
 
A Nikkor 50mm f1.8 is cheap as chips and as good as the best. It's a good addition to any Nikon based kit. Unless of course you can afford the f1.4 version
--
Regards,

Provia_fan

http://www.the-viewfinder.blogspot.com
 
Thank you JoeB2C and Provia_fan.
I will buy a Nikkor 50 1.8.
But I also want to add a zoom for convenient. Any other suggestions?
--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fuji 602z, Nikon D70, Nikon d200
 
I found a post from PuddleDuck and that is what I need.
Thank you all again.
--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fuji 602z, Nikon D70, Nikon d200
 
the sigma has hsm but some reports say the tamron may be a bit sharper
--
Every memory of looking out the back door
I had the photo album spread out on my bedroom floor
It's hard to say it, time to say it
Goodbye, goodbye
 
--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fuji 602z, Nikon D70, Nikon d200
 
New tamron 17-50 has "hsm" too, is sharp but motor is too slowwwwwwwwwwww, my experience.

--
Fuji c'est fou!

S5pro
17-50 2,8 HSM Tamron
105 2,8 AFD Nikon
18-200 OS sigma
24 mm 2,8 AIS
50 mm 1,8 AF
75-300 4.5 5.6 AF
Ring Macro extension
retro reverse ring

Lens at futur:
tokina 12/24 f4 or other
sb800
 
no the new tamron has a motor to work with the d40/40x/60. it is not hsm
--
Every memory of looking out the back door
I had the photo album spread out on my bedroom floor
It's hard to say it, time to say it
Goodbye, goodbye
 
Exact. But slowwww.

--
Fuji c'est fou!

S5pro
17-50 2,8 HSM Tamron
105 2,8 AFD Nikon
18-200 OS sigma
24 mm 2,8 AIS
50 mm 1,8 AF
75-300 4.5 5.6 AF
Ring Macro extension
retro reverse ring

Lens at futur:
tokina 12/24 f4 or other
sb800
 
If you want a fast lens with which to shoot people, the answer is easy. Get a used 35-70mm f2.8. Its a fantastic portrait lens, that only a few years ago was the standard portrait lens for photo journalists. Get one in mint condition and you will be a very happy man. I haven't used it with the S5, but it works a treat with the S2 and the S3 and the D200.

S.
--
Wait, watch, listen, then pounce !
 
Tom Hogan says in rational lens choices:

Economy DX

First up, let’s go the economy route for APS-sized sensor DSLRs (basically all Nikon mount DSLRs except for the D3 and the Kodak Pro 14n/SLRn). Here’s the low-cost portfolio that makes sense to me:

18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S VR (not yet reviewed on this site)
55-200mm f/4-5.6G AF-S VR

What you give up in the economy kit is low-light capability. Both these lenses use 52mm filters, which means you can standardize on a small filter set. You’re going to use the 18-55mm on the camera most of the time, swapping in the 55-200mm when you need real telephoto. These lenses are far better than you'd expect for their low cost.

And I fully agree with him.

Leen Koper
http://www.fotografieleenkoper.nl
 
Yes, the 18-55 and 55-200mm VR lenses are good, and probably optically a little better than the 18-200mm. But if I had an 18-200mm, I would not be wanting to buy a pair of cheap VRs in addition to the superzoom. It would surely be more reasonable to opt for some pro or semi-pro glass, as like all cameras with fierce AA filters, the camera really needs a pro lens to bring out its good qualities.

If the OP is not interested in the 35-70mm push-pull, then he surely ought to look at a 50mm prime, or the Tamron 90mm, or the Nikon 18-35mm, or the Tamron 17-55mm f2.8, or one of the better Tokinas, or even a Sigma 50-150mm f2.8.

S.
--
Wait, watch, listen, then pounce !
 
Yes, the 18-55 and 55-200mm VR lenses are good, and probably
optically a little better than the 18-200mm. But if I had an
18-200mm, I would not be wanting to buy a pair of cheap VRs in
addition to the superzoom. It would surely be more reasonable to opt
for some pro or semi-pro glass, as like all cameras with fierce AA
filters, the camera really needs a pro lens to bring out its good
qualities.
You are right. I forgot the OP allready owned the 18-200 lens. Although the 55-200 VR is an excellent lens. I own one and it surprises me every time.
If the OP is not interested in the 35-70mm push-pull, then he surely
ought to look at a 50mm prime, or the Tamron 90mm, or the Nikon
18-35mm, or the Tamron 17-55mm f2.8, or one of the better Tokinas, or
even a Sigma 50-150mm f2.8.
The 50mm prime and the Tamron 2,8/17-50 are indeed an extremely good choice. I own both these lenses and these are wonderful.

Leen Koper
http://www.fotografieleenkoper.nl
 
I am glad we agree on everything (pretty rare, here).

I also have the 55-200mmVR. Its absolutely outstanding for what it is. I don't like the vignetting, and occasionally its softer in the corners than I would like. But viewed as a travel lens, its just about unbeatable.

I also have a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8, which beats the Nikon soundly on grounds of optics, but rarely gets an airing on account of its weight and large size.

S.
--
Wait, watch, listen, then pounce !
 
I am glad we agree on everything (pretty rare, here).

I also have the 55-200mmVR. Its absolutely outstanding for what it
is. I don't like the vignetting, and occasionally its softer in the
corners than I would like. But viewed as a travel lens, its just
about unbeatable.
It is an excellent portrait lens as well. Sofness in the corners doesnot matter very much in portraiture.
I also have a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8, which beats the Nikon soundly on
grounds of optics, but rarely gets an airing on account of its weight
and large size.
I can understand! That is why I never bought one; I prefer traveling light.

Leen Koper
http://www.fotografieleenkoper.nl
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top