The Totally Tamron Website Is Back! Visit Today For All Things Tamron

D300 Lens Options

stuvine 14 63 United Kingdom
15 Feb 2009 9:29AM
HELP, I recently bought a D300(which I love), to use with my (small) collection of Nikon Lenses, a Nikon 18-70mm, Nikon 50mm 1.8 and a Tamron 70-300 F4-5.6. I have recently sold my old camera and the Tamron with the intention of buying the Nikon 18-200mm Vr Lens to use instead of the 18-70 and the 70-300. BUT having read lots of reviews i'm having second thoughts!
Firstly lots of reviews say the 18-70 is optically better than the 18-200mm, that pictures are sharper and show less distortion. Second that the 18-200 is soft at the 200mm end.
I do a lot of Rally Car and Mountain bike photography and would use the 200mm a lot.
So my options are....
1)Go for the 18-200 and ignore the reviews.
2) Keep using the 18-70mm and buy a 70-200mm 2.8 lens instead.
Now that opens up a whole new ball game...... I can't afford the Nikon version so it's Tamron or Sigma, again from reviews I've heard the Tamron is slow to focus, and the Sigma is much faster(not as fast as Nikon version, but already said can't afford that!)
What do I do??
And where has your option for the best price??
p.s. Sorry to go on! But i'm off on holiday to Canada Snowboarding on Friday and i'd like my shiny new lens for then!!

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

csurry 17 9.2k 92
15 Feb 2009 9:34AM
If you want to do action shots then I'd go for the sigma 70-200, the 18-200 is a compromise and given you already have the 18-70 apart from the reduced amount to be carried can't see any other advantage in it over a 70-200.
VolcanoCowboy 13 157 England
15 Feb 2009 11:11AM
I recently hired a D300 with the nikon 18-200 lens. I tested it out shooting red kite in Wales and found some of the photos to be soft at the 200 mm end of the range. I also noticed that when I had the camera hanging around my neck, the lens would zoom out buy itself.

If I were you, I'd go for the Sigma 70-200 2.8
cameracat 16 8.6k 61 Norfolk Island
15 Feb 2009 1:19PM
Obviously The Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 is the way to go......!

If it where me, And cash was a tad tight, Rather than buying the wrong lens, I'd wait and save the money to buy the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8......! !

The reason is simple, The other lens you mention are as Cheryl says, A compromise, They will never deliver the goods in the same way as the Nikon 70-200, No not never, So your gonna end up an unhappy bunny, Taking thousands of frames, That " Might Have Been ".........Sad

If you really must have a lens with a bit more range " Right Now This Minute " Then spend a little less on something like the Nikon 70-300mm ED/VR, This will give you the extra range for now, With Decent quality to cost advantage.....Smile

Then save like mad and get the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8...later.

Quote:I'd go for the Sigma 70-200

I would have concluded the same, Just so long as you can get a decent one, That actually works, Check out the forum posts regarding " Focus Calibration & Build Quality issues " ......That said when they are good, They are not bad........!

Another Edit..Sad If you want to see what a Nikon 70-300mm ED/VR can do, Look at my recent upload called Splash.....!
Ganto 13 769 2 Ireland
15 Feb 2009 1:31PM
DO NOT get rid of your 18-70... it's a crackin' wee lens.
You do a lot of action shots so the f2.8 will be a great advantage to keep you shutter speeds up.
If money is tight, buy the Sigma 70-200, but if you could save a bit longer then the Nikon 70-200 the one.
dave thelens 16 936 United Kingdom
15 Feb 2009 1:39PM
Save up and wait for the Nikon 70/200 f2.8 VR lens ... money well spent

chalkhillblue 11 164 2 United Kingdom
15 Feb 2009 1:48PM
I must agree with the last few posts, I have been fortunate to have owned the 70-200 f2.8 for the last eight months and never regretted it for one moment, I use it at times with the 1.4 TC (this gives you 280mm) with super results. It is one superb lens.
Rob_Taylor 15 661 5 Wales
15 Feb 2009 2:35PM
What about the Nikon 80-200?
Half the price of a 70-200 and seems a bargain by the current (rising) lens prices.

stuvine 14 63 United Kingdom
15 Feb 2009 4:09PM
Thanks for all the advice, firstly the nikon 70-200 Vr would be great, but there is firstly saving the extra cash, but then i's have to warrant it to my wife......that would be the hard part!!!!
From all of the comments there seems to be nothing good to say about the 18-200!!!!
JamesBurns 11 1.3k 7
15 Feb 2009 9:18PM

Quote:What about the Nikon 80-200?
Half the price of a 70-200 and seems a bargain by the current (rising) lens prices.


Cracking lens...
JohnParminter 13 1.3k 14 England
17 Feb 2009 12:53PM
I've got the sig 70-200 2.8 and D300 and have had good results with it but after a lot of bother getting the focus motor changed under waranty.
Good when it works.
digicammad 16 22.0k 39 United Kingdom
17 Feb 2009 12:57PM
The 18-200 is a belting walkabout lens, but does suffer from a occasional softness at the long end. This should come as no surprise given the range. I also have the 70-200 f2.8 VR and can vouch for the quality, it's a cracking piece of kit and always a pleasure to use.

digicammad 16 22.0k 39 United Kingdom
17 Feb 2009 1:00PM
BTW, as far as I know the 80-200 has no VR so you need to decide whether you want that. I handhold a lot or use a monopod, so it is important to me.

stuvine 14 63 United Kingdom
18 Feb 2009 1:47PM
Well.......thnks for your help and suggestionsd, but i've thrown a total curve ball into this!!!
I thought long and hard about the type of photography I do and want to do and decided I probably won't use a long lens that much at the moment(not enough to warrant shelling out at least 600), so i've gone the other way and bought a sigma 10-20mm wide lens.
I think creatively i'm going to get a lot more out of this lens at the moment and have read really good reviews of it. I've also bought a sigma 70-300 APO lens so i have a longer lens, but know not too expect too much from it.
So off to Canada i go, and will hopefully come back with some cracking landscape shots!!!!
fastandy 14 70
18 Feb 2009 6:14PM

Quote:What about the Nikon 80-200?
Half the price of a 70-200 and seems a bargain by the current (rising) lens prices.


have to agree ive got a 20 year old 80-200 had some great sharp results with it,if you can live with the slightly slower autofocus!

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.