D90 lens

On 2011-04-13 00:42:49 -0700, Y Khan said:

Hi,

I have bought new D90 and planning to buy extra lens shall I buy
18-200mm or 18-300mm please advise

Nikon does not make an 18-300mm. They do make a 28-300mm, which is what
I presume you meant. I have both these lenses, which I use only their
appropriate bodies.

The 18-200mm is a DX lens. You will only be able to use it in crop mode
if you ever get an FX camera. But then, why would you do that? The
advantage of the 18-200, of course, is that you get a wide angle lens
for your D90.

The 28-300mm is an FX lens. On an FX camera it has the same zoom range
as the 18-200mm on a DX camera. On a DX camera it would have the 35mm
equivalent of a 42-450mm zoom. That would give you quite a reach at the
long end on your D90, but there are better lenses that would do even
more, such as the 80-400. The 28-300mm will not serve as a wide angle
zoom on your D90.

I would get the 18-200mm.

Of course, both of these lenses have extreme zoom ranges. You pay for
that with slower apertures and a less than 200mm/300mm field of view if
focused any closer than infinity. You will also get some distortion at
the edges and both lenses will creep if not locked. Nevertheless, they
are fine lenses and they are capable of producing very good results if
you know what you are doing. If you don't know what you are doing then
the best lenses in the world will not save you.

If you want relatively distortion free images made at fast apertures
with weather sealed lenses then you will have to cough up the big bucks
for them. There is a reason the 400mm f/2.8 costs about as much as a
good car. But then again, if you really needed a lens like that you
would know it and would not be asking for recommendations here.

I have the superzooms when just walking around taking snapshots. I use
the 14-24mm, 24-70mm, and 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses for most of my serious
work. But they are too heavy to lug around if I don't really need them.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

C J Campbell wrote:
On 2011-04-13 00:42:49 -0700, Y Khan said:

Hi,

I have bought new D90 and planning to buy extra lens shall I buy
18-200mm or 18-300mm please advise

Nikon does not make an 18-300mm. They do make a 28-300mm, which is what
I presume you meant. I have both these lenses, which I use only their
appropriate bodies.

The 18-200mm is a DX lens. You will only be able to use it in crop mode
if you ever get an FX camera. But then, why would you do that? The
advantage of the 18-200, of course, is that you get a wide angle lens
for your D90.

The 28-300mm is an FX lens. On an FX camera it has the same zoom range
as the 18-200mm on a DX camera. On a DX camera it would have the 35mm
equivalent of a 42-450mm zoom. That would give you quite a reach at the
long end on your D90, but there are better lenses that would do even
more, such as the 80-400. The 28-300mm will not serve as a wide angle
zoom on your D90.

I would get the 18-200mm.

Of course, both of these lenses have extreme zoom ranges. You pay for
that with slower apertures and a less than 200mm/300mm field of view if
focused any closer than infinity. You will also get some distortion at
the edges and both lenses will creep if not locked. Nevertheless, they
are fine lenses and they are capable of producing very good results if
you know what you are doing. If you don't know what you are doing then
the best lenses in the world will not save you.

If you want relatively distortion free images made at fast apertures
with weather sealed lenses then you will have to cough up the big bucks
for them. There is a reason the 400mm f/2.8 costs about as much as a
good car. But then again, if you really needed a lens like that you
would know it and would not be asking for recommendations here.

I have the superzooms when just walking around taking snapshots. I use
the 14-24mm, 24-70mm, and 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses for most of my serious
work. But they are too heavy to lug around if I don't really need them.

As mentioned above the 70-300 is supposed to be a pretty decent lens (or
was that the 80-400 g) and that would match up just fine with the kit
lens you presumably have. If you just want a one-lens solution, that's
the 18-200. You don't want to be lacking 18-28 or have to switch between
two mediocre lenses for that last 100mm (the last 100mm is probably very
marginal anyways). Another sensible choice might be an 18-135 or
whatever in that range if you find the kit lens too boring. Even the
handy 70-300 is not great at 300.

If you really need 300 for a special birding interest, then consider a
third party lens like 300mm f/4 (although that's just a generalized
suggestion for direction, I don't have a specific recommendation. It
might be an 80-400 if birding is your thing.

With my first DSLR, I got only a 28-200 and had no clue I was missing
wide angle entirely; big mistake. I got by and had fun (my ignorance was
bliss) but it was a dumb decision.

On 2011-04-13 21:40:09 -0700, Paul Furman said:

C J Campbell wrote:
On 2011-04-13 00:42:49 -0700, Y Khan said:

Hi,

I have bought new D90 and planning to buy extra lens shall I buy
18-200mm or 18-300mm please advise

Nikon does not make an 18-300mm. They do make a 28-300mm, which is what
I presume you meant. I have both these lenses, which I use only their
appropriate bodies.

The 18-200mm is a DX lens. You will only be able to use it in crop mode
if you ever get an FX camera. But then, why would you do that? The
advantage of the 18-200, of course, is that you get a wide angle lens
for your D90.

The 28-300mm is an FX lens. On an FX camera it has the same zoom range
as the 18-200mm on a DX camera. On a DX camera it would have the 35mm
equivalent of a 42-450mm zoom. That would give you quite a reach at the
long end on your D90, but there are better lenses that would do even
more, such as the 80-400. The 28-300mm will not serve as a wide angle
zoom on your D90.

I would get the 18-200mm.

Of course, both of these lenses have extreme zoom ranges. You pay for
that with slower apertures and a less than 200mm/300mm field of view if
focused any closer than infinity. You will also get some distortion at
the edges and both lenses will creep if not locked. Nevertheless, they
are fine lenses and they are capable of producing very good results if
you know what you are doing. If you don't know what you are doing then
the best lenses in the world will not save you.

If you want relatively distortion free images made at fast apertures
with weather sealed lenses then you will have to cough up the big bucks
for them. There is a reason the 400mm f/2.8 costs about as much as a
good car. But then again, if you really needed a lens like that you
would know it and would not be asking for recommendations here.

I have the superzooms when just walking around taking snapshots. I use
the 14-24mm, 24-70mm, and 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses for most of my serious
work. But they are too heavy to lug around if I don't really need them.

As mentioned above the 70-300 is supposed to be a pretty decent lens
(or was that the 80-400 g) and that would match up just fine with the
kit lens you presumably have. If you just want a one-lens solution,
that's the 18-200. You don't want to be lacking 18-28 or have to switch
between two mediocre lenses for that last 100mm (the last 100mm is
probably very marginal anyways). Another sensible choice might be an
18-135 or whatever in that range if you find the kit lens too boring.
Even the handy 70-300 is not great at 300.

If you really need 300 for a special birding interest, then consider a
third party lens like 300mm f/4 (although that's just a generalized
suggestion for direction, I don't have a specific recommendation. It
might be an 80-400 if birding is your thing.

With my first DSLR, I got only a 28-200 and had no clue I was missing
wide angle entirely; big mistake. I got by and had fun (my ignorance
was bliss) but it was a dumb decision.

The 80-400 VR is sloooooooow! heavy, and only really workable in good
light. I almost never use mine now.
I find the 70-300mm VR is far more useful. It is sharper than my
18-200mm VRII, which is my all purpose walk-around lens on my D300s,
and it gives me that bit of extra reach if I need it.

So my bag is usually filled with the following: D300s + 18-200mm VRII,
70-300mm VR, 35mm f/2.0, Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8.

Since most entry level Nikon buyers do not have the wallet durability
to arm themselves with the Nikkor, the 12-24mm, 24-70mm, & the 70-200
f/2.8 trinity, for projects requiring FL's of 400mm or higher, or
expensive fast lenses, rental seems a viable option.




--
Regards,

Savageduck

good inputs dear friends specially C J Cambell & Savageduck now I have
an idea which lens I have to buy
I have 18-105mm with D90 kit
I might go for 70-200mm Sigma lens

Thanks
Khan

For wide-angle you might want to consider the Tamron 10-24mm which a nice
compact lens, not too expensive and produces good quality images:

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/...4_3p5-5p6_n15/

There are more expensive lenses available as well, should you need a wider
aperture or even better quality.

Cheers,
David

On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 22:12:08 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2011-04-13 21:40:09 -0700, Paul Furman said:

C J Campbell wrote:
On 2011-04-13 00:42:49 -0700, Y Khan said:

Hi,

I have bought new D90 and planning to buy extra lens shall I buy
18-200mm or 18-300mm please advise

Nikon does not make an 18-300mm. They do make a 28-300mm, which is what
I presume you meant. I have both these lenses, which I use only their
appropriate bodies.

The 18-200mm is a DX lens. You will only be able to use it in crop mode
if you ever get an FX camera. But then, why would you do that? The
advantage of the 18-200, of course, is that you get a wide angle lens
for your D90.

The 28-300mm is an FX lens. On an FX camera it has the same zoom range
as the 18-200mm on a DX camera. On a DX camera it would have the 35mm
equivalent of a 42-450mm zoom. That would give you quite a reach at the
long end on your D90, but there are better lenses that would do even
more, such as the 80-400. The 28-300mm will not serve as a wide angle
zoom on your D90.

I would get the 18-200mm.

Of course, both of these lenses have extreme zoom ranges. You pay for
that with slower apertures and a less than 200mm/300mm field of view if
focused any closer than infinity. You will also get some distortion at
the edges and both lenses will creep if not locked. Nevertheless, they
are fine lenses and they are capable of producing very good results if
you know what you are doing. If you don't know what you are doing then
the best lenses in the world will not save you.

If you want relatively distortion free images made at fast apertures
with weather sealed lenses then you will have to cough up the big bucks
for them. There is a reason the 400mm f/2.8 costs about as much as a
good car. But then again, if you really needed a lens like that you
would know it and would not be asking for recommendations here.

I have the superzooms when just walking around taking snapshots. I use
the 14-24mm, 24-70mm, and 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses for most of my serious
work. But they are too heavy to lug around if I don't really need them.

As mentioned above the 70-300 is supposed to be a pretty decent lens
(or was that the 80-400 g) and that would match up just fine with the
kit lens you presumably have. If you just want a one-lens solution,
that's the 18-200. You don't want to be lacking 18-28 or have to switch
between two mediocre lenses for that last 100mm (the last 100mm is
probably very marginal anyways). Another sensible choice might be an
18-135 or whatever in that range if you find the kit lens too boring.
Even the handy 70-300 is not great at 300.

If you really need 300 for a special birding interest, then consider a
third party lens like 300mm f/4 (although that's just a generalized
suggestion for direction, I don't have a specific recommendation. It
might be an 80-400 if birding is your thing.

With my first DSLR, I got only a 28-200 and had no clue I was missing
wide angle entirely; big mistake. I got by and had fun (my ignorance
was bliss) but it was a dumb decision.

The 80-400 VR is sloooooooow! heavy, and only really workable in good
light. I almost never use mine now.
I find the 70-300mm VR is far more useful. It is sharper than my
18-200mm VRII, which is my all purpose walk-around lens on my D300s,
and it gives me that bit of extra reach if I need it.

So my bag is usually filled with the following: D300s + 18-200mm VRII,
70-300mm VR, 35mm f/2.0, Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8.

Since most entry level Nikon buyers do not have the wallet durability
to arm themselves with the Nikkor, the 12-24mm, 24-70mm, & the 70-200
f/2.8 trinity, for projects requiring FL's of 400mm or higher, or
expensive fast lenses, rental seems a viable option.

My D300 is equipped with a 16-85 1:3.5-5.6GED and I find that +95% of
my photography is done at the short end. I have a 70-200 to fall back
on but I find I rarely use it.

I do find that for wide angle the 16mm is a noticeable improvement
over 18mm and I wouldn't be without it.

Regards,

Eric Stevens

My D300 is equipped with a 16-85 1:3.5-5.6GED and I find that +95% of
my photography is done at the short end. I have a 70-200 to fall back
on but I find I rarely use it.

I do find that for wide angle the 16mm is a noticeable improvement
over 18mm and I wouldn't be without it.

Regards,

Eric Stevens

The 16-85mm is my favourite lens as well, Eric, although I now have a
Tamron 10-24mm which is fun as well.

If anyone wants to find out what focal lengths they do use, they may like
to try this free softwa

http://www.cpr.demon.nl/prog_plotf.html

Cheers,
David

On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 12:54:03 +0100, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

My D300 is equipped with a 16-85 1:3.5-5.6GED and I find that +95% of
my photography is done at the short end. I have a 70-200 to fall back
on but I find I rarely use it.

I do find that for wide angle the 16mm is a noticeable improvement
over 18mm and I wouldn't be without it.

Regards,

Eric Stevens

The 16-85mm is my favourite lens as well, Eric, although I now have a
Tamron 10-24mm which is fun as well.

If anyone wants to find out what focal lengths they do use, they may like
to try this free softwa

http://www.cpr.demon.nl/prog_plotf.html


JPEG only :-(

Regards,

Eric Stevens

If anyone wants to find out what focal lengths they do use, they may
like
to try this free softwa

http://www.cpr.demon.nl/prog_plotf.html


JPEG only :-(

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Doubtless he could customise it for your files given sufficient financial
incentive! G

Cheers,
David