Lens advice please

T

TangoSierra

Messages
55
Name
David
Edit My Images
No
Dear all,

Please be gentle as i'm new to the forum and new to photography therefore lack any real form of technical knowledge and could do with some advice.

I am using a Nikon D40 with 18-55mm lens but want to updgrade to a more sharper/crisper lens. I mainly take pictures of the family and landscapes etc and was thinking of getting something with longer capability.

I'm aware that the D40 was maybe not the greatest investment and believe, for the AF to work automatically, I need a lens with a motor(?) otherwise it's back to manual AF(?), people have mentioned AF-S and AF-I which I know nothing about! budget is important to me and a couple i've seen are as follows:

Tamron 70-300mm f4-5.6 Di with AF Motor - Nikon Fit - £124.00
Sigma 55-200mm f4-5.6 DC HSM Lens - Nikon Fit - £125.00 (not sure what HSM is?).
Also seen Nikon Nikkor 55-200mm for about £140ish

Can anyone recommend any of the above, or others, of course?

Thanks in advance - Dave.
 
The Nikkor 55-200mm (non-VR) version autofocuses on the D40 and can often be found here for ~£100. The VR version (as I've purchased from here) usually goes for about £140.

As for that Sigma, HSM is the motor required to autofocus on the D40. Any of those without the HSM designation will not autofocus on your camera so avoid if that's an issue.

Personally, I'm very happy with the Nikkor so would recommend that to you. (y)
 
Thanks for the response Astraeus, its greatly appreciated. Without soundling like a bigger plumb but what does VR mean and i guess the price in difference means VR is better? Thanks again, Dave.
 
I'm not too sure what VR is exactly, but my understanding is that it is a image shake reduction system.

I had a Sigma 70-300 lens for my D40, a fantastic lens, although focusing was noisy, but fast. The non-vr 55-200 Nikon lens does have some vignetting (darker edges to pictures) at extreme zooms. Don't let that put you off, it's a great cheap lens otherwise, and is staying in my bag.

(Unlike the D40 which got nabbed by some scuzzballs and now saving for replacement).

The Sigma 70-300 will set you back around £195, but if you shop around, could be snapped up for £160ish.

R
 
Nothing wrong with the D40 at all :) So what if it needs AF-S lenses. Every other brand of camera also needs lenses with their own integral focusing motors. Aren't almost all Nikon lenses AF-S anyway?

VR is Vibration Reduction. Canon call their similar system IS. Sigma's is OS and so on. All of these systems move one or more of the lens elements to compensate for camera shake with slower shutter speeds. They work extremely well, and make a dramatic difference, especially with long focal length lenses. There are no downsides except a modest cost increase, and it's a bit of a bargain, frankly.

There are other vibration damping systems, eg Sony, where the sensor moves to compensate, but optical systems are more efficient and give you the added benefit of a stabilised viewfinder too, which is a great added bonus with really long lenses.

All of which leads in the direction of the Nikkor 55-200mm VR for a bit over £200.
 
HoppyUK said:
Aren't almost all Nikon lenses AF-S anyway?
Click to expand...
Virtually all of their zooms are, and all of their big telephoto primes are. Virtually all of their primes of 200mm or shorter aren't.
 
Thanks all, I think i'll take advice and look for the Nikkor VR option. Thanks again, Dave. Ps. Anyone selling one by any chance, nothing on the for sale forum? Best regards, Dave.
 
dear all, been reading some of the other posts on here and am thinking my original post may have been a little ambitious for me. I originally wanted something with a longer zoom but am I right in thinking that these are better for sports type photo's? if so, this is not really what I wanted to do! I like taking photo's of family and scenery etc but with my standard 18-55mm, I sometimes wish I could zoom a little closer if this makes sense? Should I therefore be looking for something not as long as a 200mm or 300mm range? Hope this makes sense and sorry to be a chump with what could be basic questioning?
 
You're making perfect sense TS. Yes, longer lenses are often used for sports photography. Baically, they bring things closer, or they make close things bigger. That 55-200 VR lens sounds spot on to me, but go and try one.

To give you an idea of what the image through different focal lengths looks like, have a look here at pages 4/5 which shows the angle of view for a very wide range of lenses, from fisheye to massive telephoto. Just remember that the D40 has a crop sensor, that is when you compare focal lengths, divide the numbers on those pages by 1.5x to give you the focal length you would need on a D40 to get the same angle of view.

http://software.canon-europe.com/files/documents/EF_Lens_Work_Book_7_EN.pdf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top