Lens upgrade advice......Nikon

Bigvin

Bigvin

Messages
616
Edit My Images
No
Hi everyone

I bought myself a D5000 a few months ago with the twin lens kit. (Nikkor 18-55mm & Tamron 70-300mm) I also got myself a Raynox DCR-250 to mess about with macro.

Ok, so now i'm looking to plan ahead to get some new/old/replacement lenses which will improve on what i've got. Problem is I'm not too sure what i'll need to get. Obviously for the D5000 i'll have to get either AF-S, HSM or OSM lenses to retain auto focus, but what lenses should I go for?

I photograph lots of different things so i'll need a variety of lenses i presume.

I'm not sure if the 18-55 will do for the landscape pics or whether i should get something else???

Is the Tamron 70-300 ok? Would the Nikon 70-200/70-300 be any better? (Why have I found some Nikon 70-300's for sale because the person has just bought a Nikon 70-200?????) Or should I keep the Tamron for a general walkabout lens and go for the sigma 150-500mm which i would like for wildlife?

As far as macro goes I was thinking of maybe a Tamron 90mm or a Sigma 105mm however there is a few Nikon 60mm lenses going cheap. Would the 60mm be ok or would I need a longer working distance for the insects that I (try) to shoot. Would I need anything else to get good magnification like extension tubes or anything? Would my Raynox still work with this or would it be too much with a 1:1 macro lens? Also I know most macro photography is done by manual focusing but would I need the AF function to use the lens for other things?

Alternatively should I buy a D90 or D300 to enable me a wider/better choice of lenses?

Sorry to go on for so long but it saves me from clogging up the threads with multiple posts. I'd just like to get some advice before I go down a path of buying kit which i'll need to replace after a year or two.

Budget wise, I haven't got loads of money to spend hence why most of the stuff is either Tamron or Sigma. This is going to be an ongoing project with a lens every few months.

Thanks for any input and advice.

Cheers
 
Well what a lot of questions. I will try and help where I can :thinking:.

1: The 18-55 is not a bad lens but a good cost effective upgrade is the Nikon 18-70 AF-S. There are a few floating around on the for sale section for about £120. Nikon have a habit of making the odd lower budget lens that is fantastic and this is one of them. You could also look at the sigma and tamron versions.

2: The Tamron 70-300 I don't know much about however the Nikon 70-300 AF-S VR is a fantastic lens and as above punches well above it's price tag, I have just started to use it with a Kenko 1.4 tc for wild life and the results are really quite good. The 70-200 is a whole new ball game as it is a pro lens with the pro price tag. It does offer constant f2.8 and is probably one of the best lenses out there. If you don't need the pro lens then the Nikon 70-300 AF-S VR is the best bang per buck.

3: A lot of people sem to go for the Tamron 90mm as the cheaper alternative to the Nikon 105 VR. I have just got the older adaptall version to try it out and will probably look for a newer af one when funds permit as trying to mf other than for macro is not for me (the kids move too fast :bang:). I have also looked at the Nikon 60mm Macro as it seems to have good reviews but it may be a bit short in terms of min focus distance if you are going to be doing macro of creepy crawlies as the 90mm will allow you to stay further away and not spook them.

I would not try and upgrade the body yet. The D500 is a very capable camera and until you find it is constraining you, or you find that other bodies have specific features that you really need then upgrade the glass first as it holds it's value far better in the long run.

Anyway hope my ramblings are of use.

Nick
 
The 70 - 300 VR is really impressive and a very sharo lens, well worth it. I dont think changing the body so soon would be beneficial, I have had my D90 18 months and am now really getting to use a lot more of its capabilities. As said get to the end of what your camera is capable of before you think about upgrading.

The 90 2.8 Tamron is also very sharp and works well as a portrait lens if you work with its slower than normal focussing.
 
You may find the D5000 feels a bit 'lost' with a 70-300 bolted to it - it's not a big camera...
 
Arkady said:
You may find the D5000 feels a bit 'lost' with a 70-300 bolted to it - it's not a big camera...
Click to expand...

Actually, having tried the 70-300 VR on it, it feels wonderful. Really compact and easy to hold still. :)
 
Perhaps he meant 70-200? :shrug: as they're bigger than 70-300s... :thinking:
 
Tractor Boy said:
Well what a lot of questions. I will try and help where I can :thinking:.

1: The 18-55 is not a bad lens but a good cost effective upgrade is the Nikon 18-70 AF-S. There are a few floating around on the for sale section for about £120. Nikon have a habit of making the odd lower budget lens that is fantastic and this is one of them. You could also look at the sigma and tamron versions.

2: The Tamron 70-300 I don't know much about however the Nikon 70-300 AF-S VR is a fantastic lens and as above punches well above it's price tag, I have just started to use it with a Kenko 1.4 tc for wild life and the results are really quite good. The 70-200 is a whole new ball game as it is a pro lens with the pro price tag. It does offer constant f2.8 and is probably one of the best lenses out there. If you don't need the pro lens then the Nikon 70-300 AF-S VR is the best bang per buck.

3: A lot of people sem to go for the Tamron 90mm as the cheaper alternative to the Nikon 105 VR. I have just got the older adaptall version to try it out and will probably look for a newer af one when funds permit as trying to mf other than for macro is not for me (the kids move too fast :bang:). I have also looked at the Nikon 60mm Macro as it seems to have good reviews but it may be a bit short in terms of min focus distance if you are going to be doing macro of creepy crawlies as the 90mm will allow you to stay further away and not spook them.

I would not try and upgrade the body yet. The D500 is a very capable camera and until you find it is constraining you, or you find that other bodies have specific features that you really need then upgrade the glass first as it holds it's value far better in the long run.

Anyway hope my ramblings are of use.

Nick
Click to expand...

Thanks for taking the time to answer so many of my questions Nick.

What you say confirms some of my thoughts.

I think the 90mm Tamron will probably be the first purchase followed by the Nikon 70-300mm. (The Tamron 70-300 is quite slow sometimes on AF, I presume the Nikon will be faster?)

Never really thought about a TC in order to get the distance I want for wildlife, so i'll look into that. Cheers.

What's your thoughts on the 18-105mm instead of the 18-70mm. Just that i've seen plenty of them going cheap.

I'll also probably pick up a 35mm/50mm 1.8 on the way.

The only reason I mentioned changing bodies was so I could get lenses without the motor in them in order to save a bit of money. I'm perfectly happy with the D5000 at the minute. :)

Once again many thanks for taking the time to help.

:thumbs:
 
Dave Pickett said:
The 70 - 300 VR is really impressive and a very sharo lens, well worth it. I dont think changing the body so soon would be beneficial, I have had my D90 18 months and am now really getting to use a lot more of its capabilities. As said get to the end of what your camera is capable of before you think about upgrading.

The 90 2.8 Tamron is also very sharp and works well as a portrait lens if you work with its slower than normal focussing.
Click to expand...

Arkady said:
You may find the D5000 feels a bit 'lost' with a 70-300 bolted to it - it's not a big camera...
Click to expand...

lawrenceots said:
Actually, having tried the 70-300 VR on it, it feels wonderful. Really compact and easy to hold still. :)
Click to expand...

Thanks for the replies. :thumbs:
 
I loooked long and hard when buying my 18-70mm and read as many reviews as i could find on the subject. Ultimately the IQ is apparantly very similar for both lenses but there are a couple of differences too. The max aperture for the 18-70 is 3.5-4.5 whereas on the 18-105 its 3.5-5.6. The build quality is a bit better on the 18-70 too....it has a metal mount rather than the plastic kit one on the 105.....it also doesnt have that plasticky feel that the kit lenses usually come with. (I believe the 18-70 was actually bundled with the D300...maybe wrong on that one though!)Also the 18-70 has a rubber gasket around the mount to help prevent ingress of dust in to the lens/body. Not sure what filter size is on the 18-105 but if you are going to get the 70-300VR eventually, it shares the same 67mm thread as the 18-70....may or may not be useful. The 18-105 does however have VR but as yet I have not missed it yet on the 18-70. There are usually loads available on ebay at around the £100/£115.

Neil


EDIT: It was actually the D70 it came bundled with!! Sorry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top