Walkabout lens for a Nikon D300

Dal

Dal

Is always right
Messages
2,636
Name
Darren
Edit My Images
Yes
Not had the D300 long at all but I need to sort out a walkabout lens.

The lenses I currently have are these:-

Nikon 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 Kit lens (came with my Nikon D50 and will be sold with it soon).
Nikon 55-200mm f3.5-f5.6 Kit lens (came with my Nikon D50 and will be sold with it soon).
Sigma 70-200 f2.8, which hasn't left the D300 yet.

I don't have the cash to buy some expensive glass at the moment but want to know what I should be saving up for. I'm keen to keep with the f2.8 glass as the 70-200 is stonking.

Was thinking of the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 but can't afford it for a while, is it worth saving up for or should I look at something else. Sharpness & low light is what I want most.

For the time being though, what should I buy to tide me over (that I can sell on and hopefully wont lose much money on), Puddleduck suggested a few when I bought the camera, the Kit lens for the D70 was one of them, think it was 18-70mm.

Suggestions please as I've not really looked at the walkabout lenses much.

Thanks (y)
 
The D300 loves the 18-70 DX - I have one and its a great combo. Its the only DX lens I kept when I moved FF.

The D300 also is superb with a Tamron 24-135, exceptional lens but hard to find (I think I had that on my D700 when we met)

The Tamron 17-50 is also a great lens, again I can confirm it works great on the D300.
Ditto the Nikkor 16-85 VR.

I can't really recommend the 18-200 VR, I used one and the D300 needs much better glass.
 
I use the 16-85 and have found it to be very reasonable.
 
Don't lose sight of the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 - it's a brilliant lens for the price... The Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 AF-S is the cream of the crop though, but at a price. My Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 stays on my camera most of the time, except at rallies, where the long lens is welded on!
 
Wow, thats some fast responses.

Just been looking at some of the prices and they aren't as bad as I thought, so as I need to sell my D50 gear (hopefully £200) then I've got some other bits so might have around £350 to spend without going into my current account.

So if I focus on these for the time being (gives me some research to do then).

Sigma 24-70mm f2.8
Tamron 17-50mm f2.8
Nikon 16-85mm VR (is that an f2.8?)

Will keep an eye out for second hand ones of these:-
Nikon 18-70 DX
Tamron 24-135 (I'm guessing this is second hand only if it's hard to find).

These are the ones I wont be looking at EVER lol
Nikkor 24-70 f2.8 £1,199.99 :eek:

Thanks for the rapid replies. Feel free to post up some samples with any of those lenses and 100% crops if you've got any, not essential though.

(y)
 
If you can live with 35mm at the wide end look for a used 35-70 f2.8D Nikkor, it is the old forerunner of the 28-70 & 24-70 Nikkors, nice sharp lens for around £300.

If you want wider the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 or Sigma 24-70 f2.8.

If you can live without f2.8 the 18-70 Nikkor kit lens is a bargain for the quality.
 
Dal said:
Sigma 70-200 f2.8, which hasn't left the D300 yet.

I don't have the cash to buy some expensive glass at the moment but want to know what I should be saving up for. I'm keen to keep with the f2.8 glass as the 70-200 is stonking.

Was thinking of the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 but can't afford it for a while, is it worth saving up for or should I look at something else. Sharpness & low light is what I want most.
Click to expand...

I would seriously think about older (non HSM) version of Sigma 24-70 F/2.8. Those are relatively cheap (around 200 pounds second hand) and buying it from someone who used it, you will avoid Sigma's sample variation. Since I got mine (same 24-70 F/2.8) it practically never leaves my D200 (well apart from when I use my primes ;)). And to me the 18-70 Nikkor does not come even close to this (sorry puddleduck ;))
 
If I were you I'd keep saving and get a Nikon 17-55mm - you only need to buy it once - buy anything else and sooner or later you'll trade up to the 'real thing'! :)
 
Dal said:
so as I need to sell my D50 gear (hopefully £200) then I've got some other bits so might have around £350 to spend without going into my current account.
Click to expand...

Dal, are you looking for £200 for the D50 and 2 lenses you mentioned in the 1st post ?

If so I might be interested, my son is after a Nikon DSLR, so he can borrow my lenses. I would prefer him to have some of his own.
 
The Tamron 24-135 does turn up on fleabay (I've got two).

Here's one in the USA for £200.

A Nikon-fit one in the UK was sold last Friday for £166.
 
I use the 16-85mm on my D40X and love it. Will be moving to a D300 soon and have no doubt it will be a good combo!
 
photon said:
The Tamron 24-135 does turn up on fleabay (I've got two).

Here's one in the USA for £200.

A Nikon-fit one in the UK was sold last Friday for £166.
Click to expand...

£200 is a pretty decent price. I did see one at Ffordes for about £130 that was there for a while.

Its not a "trendy" lens, but its just very good at what is does. Far better than I expected, and its certainly better than the Nikkor 24-120 VR into those corners on full frame.

I'd like to find one for my Sony A900 actually!
 
Dal ...... as you know I use an Nikkor 18-200mm almost exclusively and as suggested I have taken some brick shots. As a walkabout lens I can't fault it but it can be a bit frustrating to use sometimes being a bit soft although I am getting? some results at f/8.0

Here are the very interesting brick shots:

#1 18mm f3.5 ISO200 1/200
7996_18mm_3_5_1-200.jpg


#2 200mm f/5.6 ISO200 1/200
7997_200mm_f5_6_1-200.jpg


#3 18mm f/3.5 ISO200 1/1600
7999_18mm_f5_6_1-1600.jpg


#4 200mm f/5.6 ISO200 1/1600
8000_200mm_f5_6_1-1600.jpg


#5 18mm f/8.0 ISO200 1/640
8002_18mm_f8_1-640.jpg


#6 200mm f/8.0 ISO200 1/640
8001_200m_f8_1-640.jpg


These were all taken at 2.9m from the subject. Not sure if any of these show 100% crop if anyone can tell me the process I am happy to post these up.

Hope this is helpful to someone?

Paul
 
On my D300, for general walkabout shooting with a single lens, I used to carry an 18-200mm, which is a perfectly respectable lens if you're in even half decent light. There are a lot of detractors, but for outright flexibility it can't be beaten. It's great for travelling 'light'.

When shooting at dusk or indoors, usually my trusty old 50mm f1.4. I've taken more of my favourite D300 photos with this lens than any other. The 105mm f2.8 VR Micro comes a close second, but there's no way that can be considered a walkabout lens.

On my D700, I have my 24-70mm f2.8. Only covers half the range of the 18-200mm, but I find I generally tend towards the shorter end of the spectrum anyway.
 
i been thinking the same thing,

sigma or nikon.

i really wanna see what the price is over in HK first
 
So the best walkabout glass for the D300 based on prices are:

Sub £200
Nikon 18-70

Sub £400
Tamron 17-50 2.8

Silly Money
Nikon 17-50 2.8

??

I think I may pick up a 18-70 based on the reviews from people here.
Is it something that I will want to upgrade quickly or is it a good bit of kit?
 
Doug said:
So the best walkabout glass for the D300 based on prices are:

Sub £200
Nikon 18-70

Sub £400
Tamron 17-50 2.8

Silly Money
Nikon 17-50 2.8

??

I think I may pick up a 18-70 based on the reviews from people here.
Is it something that I will want to upgrade quickly or is it a good bit of kit?
Click to expand...

You should still be able to find the Tamron around the
£200 mark, the Nikon 17-55 isn't really silly money secondhand or even new - there were some for £599 at Play.com last week ;)
 
Hmmmm if they were £599 new then surely I could get one for £300 SH :LOL:

I wish....

I think I will grab a 18-70 if one is available, for the money they seem to be a bargain, Unless a Tamron comes up for a nice price :)

Thanks for the advice Puddleduck and Flash in the pan :D
 
I have both the 18-200VR and the 17-55 and I'd say that 18-200 is as sharp if not sharper than my 17-55 right up to about 135mm then it starts to fall off slightly. But between 18-55mm I would say the 18-200 is probably a tad sharper. As a walkabout lens, I would honestly say the 18-200 would be the one to go for. I was at windsor today taking only my 17-55 and wished I had taken a longer lens with me really.
 
If you want something light, inexpensive and damn sharp - one vote here for the Sigma 17-70. Obviously the usual Sigma QA caveats apply, but I can't believe how good this lens is for the price and size.
 
Just my tuppenyworth...

If you can live without 18-24mm, the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 (older, non HSM version).

If you can live with f/3.5-4.5 rather than f/2.8, the Nikkor 18-70 takes some beating at its price.
 
I think you need to nail down exactly what focal lengths you consider to be usable for walkabout.

IMHO, a 24-70 of any manufacturer probably isn't wide enough on a crop body. I'd say you probably want to be starting at 17/18mm, but check a field of view calculator if you want to see exactly what I mean about these vital 6 or 7mm...

The long end, well, thats a bit easier to decide :D
 
I've been thinking about this lens choice more and more and I'm leaning more towards the 17-50mm f2.8 tamron. Can't give up that low light really as I will need that soon.

The other thing thats stepped in now if that my other half has given me the money for my old camera so if I need a walkabout lens as a last resort then I can use the 18-55mm from my old D50, not ideal but gave me another idea.

Do I go for the 17-50mm f2.8 Tamron now and save up for a wide angle lens (which was gonna be the next purchase) or do I use the old kit lens when I need it and buy the wide angle lens now (price is about the same). Was considering the faithful Sigma 10-20mm.

Main reason I thought this is I'm going to New Forrest in august and really want some good wide shots, plus I have a party I need to cover in september and a wide lens would be just as good as the tamron as I could zoom it out to 20mm if needed.

Decisions decisions doh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top