? for Nikon shooters

skydiver

skydiver

Messages
592
Name
Ken
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi Guys,

have a friend just purchased Nikon & 18-55mm kit lens but is looking for something with a bit more reach.

Personally shoot Canon so no idea what's available in Nikon fit.

So the question is, what would you guys recommend?

Was thinking along the lines of maybe a 70-300mm would give a decent range? - Nikon/Siggy/Tamron?

Funds are probably limited, so maybe something in between crap & a re-mortgage :lol:



Oh, and rough prices please...
 
Last edited:
I would say to look out for a used sigma 50-150 2.8. It seems to be an under-rated lens so can be had used (when they come up!) for reasonable money, and is half the weight of something like a 70-200 2.8, for only a bit more than the basic 55-200 nikon.... (I think mine was about £240)

Works well on dx bodies and gives the option of use with a converter if more reach is needed.
 
The Nikkor 70-300 is very good, especially with VR. New it's £450 but they can be had for a fair bit less than that 2nd hand

Jason
 
thanks for the quick replies guys,

here's the brief I got :lol:

"im thinking more grabbing shots of animals while im out walking, catching my horsie being a nut in the field that kind of thing..im just finding that i would like to be able to get a little further range than what my standard lens offers me at the moment..i obviously dont want a mahooosive long lens to cart about ..but like you say i dont wanna buy something thats only gonna last me 5 minutes or not be decent to last or do the job.. i dont really have a budget in mind at the moment, im just putting feelers out to see what i'd like and then will set aside the money for it IYSWIM? though i dont wanna be spending1000s on a lens either hahaha"
 
How much does the friend want to spend? I've got the 18-105 kit lens and it's fine 85% of the time, but I found that I needed (or wanted) something with more reach so I invested in the Nikon 70-300 VR lens - and highly recommend it over the Sigma/Tamron.

That said, if I had only had the 18-55 then I'd have probably ditched that one and bought the Nikon 18-200 VR as it covers most ranges that people are likely to need or want - plus if memory serves me right, it is an AF-S so will focus on the lower spec Nikon's.
 
If funds are limited then the Nikon 55-200 VR is the best option IMHO, great IQ and the perfect compliment to the kit lens and best of all, cheap.

Far far better than any of the cheap 70-300 options.
 
if your friend has a crop sensor Nikon (D300, D3100, D5000, D5100, D7000, D300) don't forget whatever lens they buy will act like it is about 1.5 times 'bigger'....

for instance, if they bought a 55-200, shooting at 200mm (with a crop sensor camera) would give the same result as using a 300mm lens on full frame.

there's a Nikon tool which simulates the difference here (and you can chose between cropped or full frame cameras) :
http://www.europe-nikon.com/en_GB/product/nikkor-lenses/simulator

I would also agree - the 55-200 is an excellent lens and lots lighter (and cheaper) than the 70-300 :)
 
Last edited:
Thanks for info guys,

passed it on and looking like the 70-300VR is the favoured option.

What's the going rate for a mint used version?

Trying to find out camera model...
 
Last edited:
if he had an 18-55 kit lens, then it is going to be the lower end consumer models as the D80/90/7000 come with the 18-105. You're talking D3100/5100/3000/5000/D40/etc.

In that range, the 55-200 VR was and would be my choice. It is sized to fit those models and is a good walk around lens. It focus pretty closely (3.5') and it good and sharp in good light, decently sharp in lower light. The 70-300 is also a really nice lens, but a bit bigger and more expensive. Used prices are roughly £100-125 for the 55-200 and £325 for the 70-300.

Thanks,
Rick
 
I've had both the Sigma 70-300 APO Macro and Nikon 70-300 VR. Both excellent lenses. If he has the cash, get the Nikon with VR, otherwise the Sigma is well worth buying ( HSM version has the built in focus motor) Sigma also do a stabilised version of this lens but I haven't tried one so don't know how well it works.

Allan
 
Last edited:
Nikon 70-300mm vr all day long. He/she wont need anything else really. A very underated lens. Best you will get for low money.
I have some decent glass, but I still rate that lens.

Kev.
 
The 70-300 VR is a great lens but don't overlook the newest Tamron 70-300 with VC. A lot of reviews are putting it ahead of the Nikon (though some vice versa). They're a similar sort of price I believe.

By the way to answer a couple of things on this thread:

There is indeed an AFS version of the 80-200, it's meant to be excellent but it'll be quite heavy to lug around.

The 70-300 VR is about £250-300 used depending on whether you buy privately or from a used gear dealer. Mine was £300 from Ffordes about a year ago.
 
Hi Guys,

apparantly it's a D3100, for those that asked - so looking like a x1.6 sensor?
 
It's a 1.5 so the FOV on the 70-300mm would be 105-450mm

I would recommend the 70-300mm VR as well.
 
Another vote for the 70-300 VR got mine on amazon last month brand new for £320 delivered.
 
is this the one (giving it it's full designation)?


Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G IF-ED VR ...

there seem to be others, VR DX's etc...
 
I have both teh 55-200 and the 70-300 from Nikon and both produce good reults. The AF of the 70-300 is a bit better plus the extra range it offers. What I will say is I used my 55-200 on a D3000 and it felt right I fear a 70-300 might be a bit on the bulky side for such a small body. Be best to try it first.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top