If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Suitable lense for Nikon D70
Dear Forumvisitors,
I decided to buy the Nikon D-70 camera. I am however in doubt to make the right choice for the lense. The standard lense Nikkor AF-S DX 18-70/3.5G IF ED seems nice, because it has a good wide-angle range but just a small tele-range. But I also consider the Nikkor Nikkor AF-S VR 24-120/ 3.5-5.6 G ED. This lens has a smaller wide-angle range, but a bigger tele-range, and is also stabilised. Who could share somes experience with these lenses, concerning sharpness, etc.? Eric |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The standard lense Nikkor AF-S DX 18-70/3.5G IF ED seems nice, because it
has a good wide-angle range but just a small tele-range. But I also consider the Nikkor Nikkor AF-S VR 24-120/ 3.5-5.6 G ED. This lens has a smaller wide-angle range, but a bigger tele-range, and is also stabilised. The stabilization will be really helpful in some circumstances. In general, the narrower the range of a zoom, the better the quality, but I suspect that the differences in quality will not make much of a difference in a digital camera. (And neither of these lenses has been reviewed on http://www.exc.com/photography/ If you have 60 seconds and own one of these lenses, can you take a minute to let others benefit from your experience?) -Joel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please feed the 35mm lens/digicam databases: http://www.exc.com/photography ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The standard lense Nikkor AF-S DX 18-70/3.5G IF ED seems nice, because it
has a good wide-angle range but just a small tele-range. But I also consider the Nikkor Nikkor AF-S VR 24-120/ 3.5-5.6 G ED. This lens has a smaller wide-angle range, but a bigger tele-range, and is also stabilised. The stabilization will be really helpful in some circumstances. In general, the narrower the range of a zoom, the better the quality, but I suspect that the differences in quality will not make much of a difference in a digital camera. (And neither of these lenses has been reviewed on http://www.exc.com/photography/ If you have 60 seconds and own one of these lenses, can you take a minute to let others benefit from your experience?) -Joel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please feed the 35mm lens/digicam databases: http://www.exc.com/photography ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The standard lense Nikkor AF-S DX 18-70/3.5G IF ED seems nice, because it
has a good wide-angle range but just a small tele-range. But I also consider the Nikkor Nikkor AF-S VR 24-120/ 3.5-5.6 G ED. This lens has a smaller wide-angle range, but a bigger tele-range, and is also stabilised. The stabilization will be really helpful in some circumstances. In general, the narrower the range of a zoom, the better the quality, but I suspect that the differences in quality will not make much of a difference in a digital camera. (And neither of these lenses has been reviewed on http://www.exc.com/photography/ If you have 60 seconds and own one of these lenses, can you take a minute to let others benefit from your experience?) -Joel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please feed the 35mm lens/digicam databases: http://www.exc.com/photography ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Here's my notes to myself on this issue:
http://www.edgehill.net/1/?SC=go.php...sc/photography In retrospect, maybe I'm not in such bad shape with my 28-200 & maybe I just need to learn how to use it properly. It definitely lacks wide angle though so if you think you may need that I'd go with the kit lense unless you can afford a wide angle plus a telephoto zoom, then you might as well get a huge stabilized tele & go for broke but if you aren't inclined to go that route, the kit lense is really the best choice. Image stabilization probably isn't really needed until you get into long telephoto. Another one-lense option is the VR 24-120 with adapters for wide & macro. Agh, too many choices. A good combination if you are willing to get a fancy lense later is the kit lense plus a future VR 80-400mm which is not overly bulky & would really buy some bang for the bucks down the road when you really decide you want tele. Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote: The standard lense Nikkor AF-S DX 18-70/3.5G IF ED seems nice, because it has a good wide-angle range but just a small tele-range. But I also consider the Nikkor Nikkor AF-S VR 24-120/ 3.5-5.6 G ED. This lens has a smaller wide-angle range, but a bigger tele-range, and is also stabilised. The stabilization will be really helpful in some circumstances. In general, the narrower the range of a zoom, the better the quality, but I suspect that the differences in quality will not make much of a difference in a digital camera. (And neither of these lenses has been reviewed on http://www.exc.com/photography/ If you have 60 seconds and own one of these lenses, can you take a minute to let others benefit from your experience?) -Joel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please feed the 35mm lens/digicam databases: http://www.exc.com/photography ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Here's my notes to myself on this issue:
http://www.edgehill.net/1/?SC=go.php...sc/photography In retrospect, maybe I'm not in such bad shape with my 28-200 & maybe I just need to learn how to use it properly. It definitely lacks wide angle though so if you think you may need that I'd go with the kit lense unless you can afford a wide angle plus a telephoto zoom, then you might as well get a huge stabilized tele & go for broke but if you aren't inclined to go that route, the kit lense is really the best choice. Image stabilization probably isn't really needed until you get into long telephoto. Another one-lense option is the VR 24-120 with adapters for wide & macro. Agh, too many choices. A good combination if you are willing to get a fancy lense later is the kit lense plus a future VR 80-400mm which is not overly bulky & would really buy some bang for the bucks down the road when you really decide you want tele. Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote: The standard lense Nikkor AF-S DX 18-70/3.5G IF ED seems nice, because it has a good wide-angle range but just a small tele-range. But I also consider the Nikkor Nikkor AF-S VR 24-120/ 3.5-5.6 G ED. This lens has a smaller wide-angle range, but a bigger tele-range, and is also stabilised. The stabilization will be really helpful in some circumstances. In general, the narrower the range of a zoom, the better the quality, but I suspect that the differences in quality will not make much of a difference in a digital camera. (And neither of these lenses has been reviewed on http://www.exc.com/photography/ If you have 60 seconds and own one of these lenses, can you take a minute to let others benefit from your experience?) -Joel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please feed the 35mm lens/digicam databases: http://www.exc.com/photography ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Ed Ruf wrote:
On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 12:35:59 -0800, in rec.photo.digital paul wrote: inclined to go that route, the kit lense is really the best choice. Image stabilization probably isn't really needed until you get into long telephoto. Another one-lense option is the VR 24-120 with adapters for wide & macro. Remember that to keep AF you need a combined f# of 5.6 or lower. The D70 has an AF assist light though I'm not sure how far that reaches & it is annoying for shooting people indoors but seems to work well. I read more & discovered the good tele adapters are not usable unless you have a fast f/2.8 lense. I also searched hard for a 77mm threaded wide angle conversion with no luck. This would be a cool mid range zoom for general purpose use but lacks in both tele & wide so I'd want another 2 lenses to cover that. Another problem with this one is the odd 72mm filter threads so probably couldn't be given a close-up diopter so it really is just what it is & nothing more. VR would be useful though for me & it's pretty compact. A good combination if you are willing to get a fancy lense later is the kit lense plus a future VR 80-400mm which is not overly bulky & would really buy some bang for the bucks down the road when you really decide you want tele. FWIW, all the reviews on the 80-400mm talked about focus not being fast. Though a tad bit more, I went for the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR and then added a TC-20E later. I believe this combo is more flexible and the 70-200 VR is a stellar performer. Yes that was eventually my conclusion that the 70-200 f/2.8 was a better purchase if one was inclined to spend that much & for another $350 could be adapted to a 400mm. It's a big honking lense though (both are really). It would have to be paired with probably the kit lense since I'd be hesitant to lug it around. I'm still unclear what effect a +2 close-up diopter would have on the 5 ft min focusing distance. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Eric Zwartjes" wrote in
: The standard lense Nikkor AF-S DX 18-70/3.5G IF ED seems nice, because it has a good wide-angle range but just a small tele-range. But I also consider the Nikkor Nikkor AF-S VR 24-120/ 3.5-5.6 G ED. This lens has a smaller wide-angle range, but a bigger tele-range, and is also stabilised. I think it depends on what you like. For me, the 18 (which is eq~28 in 35mm) isn't really wide enough. I just spent a vacation with my CP5k, and shot at least 1/3 of the photos with the wide angle adapter on the lens (eq~18mm in 35mm). The 24-120 is eq~35mm at the wide end, which is too long for the kinds of photos I like to take. My inclination, if I were to get a D70, would be to get the 12-24, but it costs a lot more than either of the choices you mentioned. Bob |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
camera lense? | Martin Lynch | Digital Photography | 13 | October 8th 04 09:43 PM |
Canon Lense Recommendation: 400 5.6 (non-IS) -or- 100-400 IS | Alien Clumps | Digital Photography | 5 | September 20th 04 02:40 AM |
Lense Question | Steve | Digital Photography | 15 | September 12th 04 07:21 PM |
Tamron Lense for digital camera? | Kayla | Digital Photography | 6 | September 11th 04 03:38 AM |
Lense, f-stop, focal point... DOF.... | David J. Littleboy | Digital Photography | 2 | July 15th 04 04:24 AM |