Lens advice welcomed.

PBP27

PBP27

Messages
733
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm just in the process of upgrading my Nikon D3100(which I've owned for a year) to a D7100, I was very tempted by the D600 but decided after reading many reviews and budget considerations, to go for the former, I currently own a 70-300 VRII, F1.8 35mm and the 18-55 kit lens.
Now I am trying to decide which lens to use in conjunction with the purchase of the 7100, I could opt for the 18-105 kit lens and then sell on my D3100 with the 18-55, or by the body only and put the £150 difference towards a better quality 'walkabout' lens ?
I shoot mainly motorsport events (karting mainly) and am looking to add a wide lens, possibly the Sigma 10-20 for paddock work early next year.
Budget wise for a walkabout lens I'lll have around £400-700, either used or new.
I'm keen to hear peoples thoughts.

Paul.
 
Not sure if I've read this quite right. Are you wanting a walk about with a similar range to the kit lens or an ultra wide like the Sigma or both? Personally I would maybe take one of two routes depending on what suits your pockets. Option 1 would be to blow the entire budget on either a Nikon 17-55 2.8 which is a glorious lens or a Sigma 18-35 1.8 which I know little about but it has a pretty impressive spec. If you want to eek the budget out over two lenses, I'd personally always go for a Tokina 11-16 over the Sigma 10-20. A used one would leave you change for something like a Tamron 17-50 or a Nikon 16-85 depending on what's important to you (range or speed).
 
I am very happy with my 17-55, my next lens will be a 50-500 sigma, although this might be a bit to big and heavy for a walk about lens. If fact both probably are!

Sorry not a great help I know, the d7100 is a lovely camera thou. I still sleep with mine :love:
 
The 18-55 is a little better lens than the 18-105... I would think it a "reasonable" walkabout focal range on DX. As I see it he problem is that the D7100 is probably the most demanding Nikon DSLR there is right now... It requires good glass and good technique.
 
Thank you all for your replies. I have researched many of the lenses mentioned so it is good to hear your views here, the 17-55 f2.8 sounds lovely and would be ideal if I can find a used one at the right price. I wasn't sure over which wide was better,the Tokina 11-16 or the similar Sigma, so it was interesting to hear your comment Graham.
The Sigma 50-500 will be a little way off yet for me Nick but it's good to hear that you sleep with your D7100 ! I really have spent a long time researching if it is the right camera for me, especially with the limited buffer as they may affect some of my Karting action shots, I'll just have to learn to work around it.
Steven, I know that I will need good glass for the 7100, the cost of which frightens me to be truthful ! I will just have to take things easy and learn to live with what I have until I win the lotto :). I think I will definitely just buy the camera body now though, I can always use the 18-55 kit lens until I can upgrade my glass.
 
PBP27 said:
Thank you all for your replies. I have researched many of the lenses mentioned so it is good to hear your views here, the 17-55 f2.8 sounds lovely and would be ideal if I can find a used one at the right price. I wasn't sure over which wide was better,the Tokina 11-16 or the similar Sigma, so it was interesting to hear your comment Graham.
The Sigma 50-500 will be a little way off yet for me Nick but it's good to hear that you sleep with your D7100 ! I really have spent a long time researching if it is the right camera for me, especially with the limited buffer as they may affect some of my Karting action shots, I'll just have to learn to work around it.
Steven, I know that I will need good glass for the 7100, the cost of which frightens me to be truthful ! I will just have to take things easy and learn to live with what I have until I win the lotto :). I think I will definitely just buy the camera body now though, I can always use the 18-55 kit lens until I can upgrade my glass.
Click to expand...


Before I got my d7100 I was thinking of going FF but to be honest the price of glass for FF put me off, its bad enough for a crop!

maybe one day I will upgrade but at the moment I am more then happy, I haven't tried the camera on burst mode so I really don't know what it would be like, but if I was doing sports type shots I would properly pan so would want a slow shutter anyway.

I remember looking at all the specs and comparing, but to be honest as I am an amateur the 'real life' shooting I do I found that the camera specs really don't mean that much to me, you work with what you have I guess!

oh if it help I also have a Tokina 11-16, I have never owned anything to compare it with but I like it!
 
It sounds like I have been thinking along the same lines as you, I was dead keen on buying the D600 , in the end though the stories of the shutter problems convinced me to leave it alone and I can't really afford a 610 or 800. I'm looking forward to the extra sharpness the 7100 should bring over the 3100 with my racing shots and naturally the other benefits too.
I think I have only used the burst mode on the 3100 twice properly when at a race track, so I can't see myself changing my style anyway, like you I am shooting a lot of panning shots, just seeing how slow I can go and how dramatic that effect it can bring to my photos.
I'll check out the eBay prices of the Tokina wide, I shouldn't think they will differ much from the Sigma that I was looking at.
 
Well first all you have a cracking lens in 70-300vrii, that's is one of most under rated nikon lenses out there and great for the money. I had a nikon 12-24 f4 that I sold on to help fund a nikon 17-55 f2.8. Whilst the 17-55 is a great lens I sometimes regret selling the 12-24 as it was a great lens but I went with a more useful longer focal range to me over the UWA and 17-55 is very sharp, it's worth it reputation.

One thing I would say is the nikon 17-55 isn't really a walk about lens as it's so heavy, surprising heavy compared to a kit lens, you do know it's there. I would suggest either getting a standard zoom or a UWA, buying right first time then save for the other than buy both now and then upgrade later. Saying that there are some great cheap lens out there, the nikon 18-70 is pretty good for a kit lens (quite sharp and light) and could your answer for a "walkabout lens" and still leave loads for a great UWA. Depends what more important to you an easily walkabout lens, a great standard zoom or great UWA.
 
You will like the AF, the 51 point AF seems to be pretty good. It locks onto moving targets well, I seem to get more in focus shots when I do a burst (shooting moving/flying wildlife I usually take 2-3 shots in one burst, trying to get the peak action point). I thought about the d600 too but the 39 point AF, smaller AF coverage and sensor issues put me off for wildlife, I don't regret buying the d7100.
 
If me, I'd sell everything apart from the 35mm, with the budget and you money off the 70-300 you could maybe afford a Tamron 70-200 f2.8 VC and maybe even the 17-55 f2.8 Tamron to go with it.
 
Ivan S said:
If me, I'd sell everything apart from the 35mm, with the budget and you money off the 70-300 you could maybe afford a Tamron 70-200 f2.8 VC and maybe even the 17-55 f2.8 Tamron to go with it.
Click to expand...

I think I would miss the range of the 300, a lot of my best shots this year have been around the 250-300mm range, however I would love a 70-200 f2.8 too !
 
PBP27 said:
I think I would miss the range of the 300, a lot of my best shots this year have been around the 250-300mm range, however I would love a 70-200 f2.8 too !
Click to expand...
But maybe you forget, the crop factor of the D7100, it's supposed to be pretty good(as in the 1.3x crop mode I think it's called) will get you in closer as the extra mega pixels will help a lot, either in camera or just cropping yourself.
 
rob-nikon said:
Well first all you have a cracking lens in 70-300vrii, that's is one of most under rated nikon lenses out there and great for the money. I had a nikon 12-24 f4 that I sold on to help fund a nikon 17-55 f2.8. Whilst the 17-55 is a great lens I sometimes regret selling the 12-24 as it was a great lens but I went with a more useful longer focal range to me over the UWA and 17-55 is very sharp, it's worth it reputation.

One thing I would say is the nikon 17-55 isn't really a walk about lens as it's so heavy, surprising heavy compared to a kit lens, you do know it's there. I would suggest either getting a standard zoom or a UWA, buying right first time then save for the other than buy both now and then upgrade later. Saying that there are some great cheap lens out there, the nikon 18-70 is pretty good for a kit lens (quite sharp and light) and could your answer for a "walkabout lens" and still leave loads for a great UWA. Depends what more important to you an easily walkabout lens, a great standard zoom or great UWA.
Click to expand...
The 18-70 is a good suggestion along with the UWA and something that I could afford without over spending on the 17-55 f2.8, I do want to look to the future and a possible FF switch, so must aim for lenses that would suit that too.
 
Ivan S said:
But maybe you forget, the crop factor of the D7100, it's supposed to be pretty good(as in the 1.3x crop mode I think it's called) will get you in closer as the extra mega pixels will help a lot, either in camera or just cropping yourself.
Click to expand...

Yes that is true and the crops that I have seen with the f2.8 70-200 have been superb,there is a lot to consider.
 
rob-nikon said:
You will like the AF, the 51 point AF seems to be pretty good. It locks onto moving targets well, I seem to get more in focus shots when I do a burst (shooting moving/flying wildlife I usually take 2-3 shots in one burst, trying to get the peak action point). I thought about the d600 too but the 39 point AF, smaller AF coverage and sensor issues put me off for wildlife, I don't regret buying the d7100.
Click to expand...

That is a bit different to the 11 points that I've been using this year, although it has been great practice and taught me a lot about composition with my shots.
 
PBP27 said:
I wasn't sure over which wide was better,the Tokina 11-16 or the similar Sigma, so it was interesting to hear your comment Graham.
Click to expand...

The Sigma is a nice lens and is a little cheaper, certainly if buying used, Sigma's seems to go for around £240ish where as the Tokina would be more like £300. To me, the big worry with the Sigma is the chance of getting a soft copy and there seem to be a few about. The Tokina's seem more consistent in performing excellently and they're very sharp indeed. Having f/2.8 available can be useful too. The Sigma does offer a much more useful range though.
 
PBP27 said:
Yes that is true and the crops that I have seen with the f2.8 70-200 have been superb,there is a lot to consider.
Click to expand...
A good 70-200 f/2.8 w/ a 2x is a viable option for longer FL with better light, and it's still a 2.8 if the light's not so good.

I would not hope for much crop with the D7100 (nor the 7000/800 either) unless the light is very good and you can keep the iso ~800...
 
I have been watching the 70-200 2.8 's selling on eBay, they still hold their value very well which unfortunatley eats heavily into my budget. I will go for a UWA first and then decide on which way I go from there, meanwhile I'll use the lenses that I have for now until my budget grows, hopefully for next year.
 
Well I picked up a Sig 10-20mm off of eBay this week (for just under £200), so I'll be sticking with the DX cameras for now, I aim to pick up a D7100 over the next couple of weeks from John Lewis. I'll be trying out the UWA Sigma over the weekend if the weather holds out for long enough.
 
I have the Nikon 17-55 on a D7000 body and its a fantastic piece of glass indeed! Still have the 16-85VR that needs selling now. The 17-55 is sooo sharp it almost hurts, especially around F4...F2.8 is also very sharp too. I also have the Tokina 11-16 which is also a stellar piece of engineering. Generally thought of as the best UWA available for a crop-sensor camera in terms of IQ and BQ. The other lens i have recently acquired is the Siggy 70-200 F2.8 MK2...i have it with a 1.4 TC and it takes fantastically crisp shots....my avatar was shot with it. Again build quality is very very good...its feels solid and should be able to withstand a knock or two! One to think about for the future....

Best,

Neil
 
neilos100 said:
I have the Nikon 17-55 on a D7000 body and its a fantastic piece of glass indeed! Still have the 16-85VR that needs selling now. The 17-55 is sooo sharp it almost hurts, especially around F4...F2.8 is also very sharp too. I also have the Tokina 11-16 which is also a stellar piece of engineering. Generally thought of as the best UWA available for a crop-sensor camera in terms of IQ and BQ. The other lens i have recently acquired is the Siggy 70-200 F2.8 MK2...i have it with a 1.4 TC and it takes fantastically crisp shots....my avatar was shot with it. Again build quality is very very good...its feels solid and should be able to withstand a knock or two! One to think about for the future....

Best,

Neil
Click to expand...
Yes they are great options that I will definitely consider, although it will be a while now before my budget builds back up enough for another lens purchase. I am craving for the 17-55 and will want a F2.8 tele right after that !
I gave the Sig 10-20 a work out yesterday and was very pleased , it's always a bit of a worry buying lenses on eBay but this seems like a good'n.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top