I'm wondering which lens I should get next. Wanted to know what you all thought first. So what do you think of the 18-200 VR lens? I was thinking that this would be a good overall lens. It would either be this, A macro, or a fisheye lens. Oh and if you have any thoughts on good macro/fisheye lenses then please elaborate.
Thanks-anya
Visit My Website
Leave some Love at my blog
Full Version: What do you think of the 18-200 VR lens
I would not get the 18-200, although it is tempting because of the range, you are also sacrificing quality because of the range.
Fisheye = 10.5mm DX is sweet for a fish, but the 14mm is a great ultrawide rectilinear lens (no major distortion like a fish).
Macro = Tamron 90mm f/2.8 is one of the sharpest macros I've seen.
And you can pick it up new for under $500.
Fisheye = 10.5mm DX is sweet for a fish, but the 14mm is a great ultrawide rectilinear lens (no major distortion like a fish).
Macro = Tamron 90mm f/2.8 is one of the sharpest macros I've seen.
And you can pick it up new for under $500.
I love primes!
28, 50, 85 as fast as you can afford!
I only bring two zooms to weddings 12-24 (older f4, but who cares when it's that wide) and the 80-200 2.8 VR. If you want to see what can be done with only 5 lenses check this out http://ehegwer.pixyblog.com/ Be sure to leave a comment!
28, 50, 85 as fast as you can afford!
I only bring two zooms to weddings 12-24 (older f4, but who cares when it's that wide) and the 80-200 2.8 VR. If you want to see what can be done with only 5 lenses check this out http://ehegwer.pixyblog.com/ Be sure to leave a comment!
I own the 18-200VR. I love it as a walkaround lens if I am just doing my own thing and want to travel light. I carry a D80 with the 18-200 with me everywhere in daily life just for practice and grab shots.
For a paid assignment, where you have time to plan your tools, I am not convinced it is the best tool for the job because of the small minimum aperture and the sacrifice in image quality compared to lenses with a smaller zoom range or certainly primes.
That said, it depends what you are shooting and the light available. If I was carrying two bodies and I knew one of them was going to have a fisheye, I might use the 18-200 on the other body just so I knew I would be less likely to miss a shot that would not be caught with the 17-55 or 70-200 I would normally carry on that body.
I am looking for a fun fisheye, so I would be interested in folks opinions. I have the Sigma 10-20 and love it. I use it for realestate interiors, landscapes and even weddings. I do wish it was faster though.
Jeff
www.jmitchelphotography.com
For a paid assignment, where you have time to plan your tools, I am not convinced it is the best tool for the job because of the small minimum aperture and the sacrifice in image quality compared to lenses with a smaller zoom range or certainly primes.
That said, it depends what you are shooting and the light available. If I was carrying two bodies and I knew one of them was going to have a fisheye, I might use the 18-200 on the other body just so I knew I would be less likely to miss a shot that would not be caught with the 17-55 or 70-200 I would normally carry on that body.
I am looking for a fun fisheye, so I would be interested in folks opinions. I have the Sigma 10-20 and love it. I use it for realestate interiors, landscapes and even weddings. I do wish it was faster though.
Jeff
www.jmitchelphotography.com
QUOTE(Johnny @ November 29 2007, 10:31 AM) 
I would not get the 18-200, although it is tempting because of the range, you are also sacrificing quality because of the range.
Fisheye = 10.5mm DX is sweet for a fish, but the 14mm is a great ultrawide rectilinear lens (no major distortion like a fish).
Macro = Tamron 90mm f/2.8 is one of the sharpest macros I've seen.
And you can pick it up new for under $500.
Fisheye = 10.5mm DX is sweet for a fish, but the 14mm is a great ultrawide rectilinear lens (no major distortion like a fish).
Macro = Tamron 90mm f/2.8 is one of the sharpest macros I've seen.
And you can pick it up new for under $500.
QUOTE(Eric Hegwer @ November 29 2007, 10:39 AM)
I love primes!
28, 50, 85 as fast as you can afford!
I only bring two zooms to weddings 12-24 (older f4, but who cares when it's that wide) and the 80-200 2.8 VR. If you want to see what can be done with only 5 lenses check this out http://ehegwer.pixyblog.com/ Be sure to leave a comment!
28, 50, 85 as fast as you can afford!
I only bring two zooms to weddings 12-24 (older f4, but who cares when it's that wide) and the 80-200 2.8 VR. If you want to see what can be done with only 5 lenses check this out http://ehegwer.pixyblog.com/ Be sure to leave a comment!
So are primes just another name for a type of macro lens?
I haven't figured it out yet?
A prime is a non zoom lens. It is a fixed MM focal length. (You can still focus it near or far though)
One of my faves is the Nikon 50mm f1.8. It is very fast, produces great quality and is small, lightweight and cheap! It can be had at reputable retailers for about $100.
A prime lense typically has less optics and less complicated optics than a zoom lens which makes it less expensive and offer potencially higher quality.
One of my faves is the Nikon 50mm f1.8. It is very fast, produces great quality and is small, lightweight and cheap! It can be had at reputable retailers for about $100.
A prime lense typically has less optics and less complicated optics than a zoom lens which makes it less expensive and offer potencially higher quality.
QUOTE(anyaandthebabies @ November 29 2007, 11:20 AM)
So are primes just another name for a type of macro lens?
I haven't figured it out yet?
I haven't figured it out yet?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.