Upgrading Lenses Advice pls

5

5thumbs

Messages
66
Edit My Images
Yes
I currently own a Nikon D7100 and two lenses: a Sigma 10-20mm and a Nikon 18-200mm VR. I mainly use these for travel photography and more and more I'm getting into landscape photography for which the Sigma has been great.

I'm aware that the convenience of the 18-200mm does come with some compromise in terms of IQ although its by no means bad.

My question is, if I want to improve IQ what would be the best upgrade path for me in terms of lenses? There seem to be almost endless choices of lenses in the Nikon range let alone considering other brands. Its not clear to me whether I should just be looking at DX lenses or whether full frame lenses would work (I've seen this suggested elsewhere and am a bit puzzled).

Lastly, I'm not looking to do this in one go so a plan or an upgrade over a period of time is fine (don't think I could afford to anyway!).

Advice very welcome.
 
Depends what part of the 18-200 you are wanting to replace? The 18-50 end or the 55-200 end? And what is your budget?

Nikon 17-55 2.8
Tamron 17-50 2.8

Nikon 70-200 2.8
Sigma 70-200 2.8

are obvious suggestions, but pricey........... but all good IQ lenses are going to cost a few bob. ;)
 
Zarch

thanks for your comments. I suppose I'm looking to potentially replace both my lenses.

Is it worth replacing my Sigma at the wide end? Would a Nikon equivalent for example give a noticeable improvement in IQ?
How would I best cover the 20-200 range? I'm assuming this will be more than one lens but whats the best way to do this on a DX format?

I appreciate this isn't going to be cheap hence my comment about working towards this over time.
 
5thumbs said:
Its not clear to me whether I should just be looking at DX lenses or whether full frame lenses would work (I've seen this suggested elsewhere and am a bit puzzled).
Click to expand...
5thumbs said:
How would I best cover the 20-200 range? I'm assuming this will be more than one lens but whats the best way to do this on a DX format?
Click to expand...
You seem to be a bit confused about the differences between DX lenses and full frame lenses. So hopefully I can help there.
Basically, DX lenses project an image circle which will cover a DX sensor, whereas full frame lenses project an image circle which will cover a full frame sensor. So obviously a full frame lens will work on a DX sensor - you'll just be seeing the central portion of the image, hence the term 'crop sensor'. But put a DX lens on a full frame camera and the image won't fill the frame, which is why Nikon FX bodies have a 'DX crop' mode.

However, that's the only difference. The key issue for you is that the focal length is a physical property of a lens and isn't affected by the sensor size. We had someone on the phone at work yesterday who wanted to hire a 70-300mm FX lens because he thought it would give him more reach than his 18-300mm DX lens. He'd heard people say that 300mm on DX is the equivalent of 450mm, but he didn't really understand, and we could not persuade him he was wrong. I guess he'll find out when he puts the lens on his camera...
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
That's very helpful - thanks.

So I think what you are saying is that for example an 18-55mm lens would give the same range of view on a crop sensor regardless of whether the lens was DX or FX? If so I'm much clearer now!

In terms of my original question I'm assuming a Nikon (or Sigma)70-200 f2.8 as boh seem well regarded. Any suggestions for the 20-70 range?

Also, are there better options than my Sigma 10-20mm?

Thanks all.
 
5thumbs said:
That's very helpful - thanks.

So I think what you are saying is that for example an 18-55mm lens would give the same range of view on a crop sensor regardless of whether the lens was DX or FX? If so I'm much clearer now!

In terms of my original question I'm assuming a Nikon (or Sigma)70-200 f2.8 as boh seem well regarded. Any suggestions for the 20-70 range?

Also, are there better options than my Sigma 10-20mm?

Thanks all.
Click to expand...

24-70 f2.8 nikkor is as steller lens and would be totally fine on a crop sensor for portraits, general travel etc. for landscapes on crop probably too long.

A 16-35f4 would be probably wide enough for landscapes on a crop sensor. It would be so much sharper than the sigma and on crop wide enough for 99% of scenarios.
 
One thing I would say is that FX lenses are big and heavy, not necessarily what you want for travel.

My view is that, at least in the wide angle and standard range you are better off sticking with DX lenses, the Tamrons mentioned above would be a good budget choice or the Nikon equivalents if you're feeling a bit richer. If you want to replace the Sigma then the Nikon equivalent would be the obvious choice, or maybe the Tokina 11-17.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top