Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Nikon Lens Advice

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 30, 2012, 1:37 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Northwest NJ
Programs: Starwood Platinum,Marriott Platinum, United Silver
Posts: 2,313
Nikon Lens Advice

I own two bodies - an older D90 and a new D5100. The old camera has a 35-105 ZOOM but it is AF and not AF-S so there is no autofocus with the D5100. The D-90 has the Nikon 18-200 zoom, an amazing lens but very heavy.

Going to Thailand and would love a slight wide angle to telephoto lens. I would happily take the 35-105 but would really like to have autofocus - I just want a lighter combination than either body with the heavy lens.

Any recommendations for the best lightweight lens to fit my needs? Many thanks.
stevens397 is offline  
Old Dec 30, 2012, 2:29 pm
  #2  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
Posts: 31,185
Originally Posted by stevens397
I own two bodies - an older D90 and a new D5100. The old camera has a 35-105 ZOOM but it is AF and not AF-S so there is no autofocus with the D5100. The D-90 has the Nikon 18-200 zoom, an amazing lens but very heavy.

Going to Thailand and would love a slight wide angle to telephoto lens. I would happily take the 35-105 but would really like to have autofocus - I just want a lighter combination than either body with the heavy lens.

Any recommendations for the best lightweight lens to fit my needs? Many thanks.
16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S DX II.

At an equivalent 24-105 it is Nikon's best DX single-lens option and unlike most superzooms is actually very good at the 16 end with relatively low, simple-type distortion, low CA, etc. Also, the second-generation VR makes the relatively slow max aperture on the long end much less of an issue.

At ~$600 it is IMO a bargain

The 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S DX [28-135 equivalent] is another option but it isn't nearly as good at 18 as the 16-85 is at 16. It is also not built as well and at ~$400 isn't the bargain that the 16-85 is.
anrkitec is offline  
Old Dec 30, 2012, 5:14 pm
  #3  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: LCH
Programs: Continited, DL, KLM/AF, AA, US, AS, AC, VS, LH, BA, QF, NH
Posts: 72
There are going to be a gazillion new 24-85 f/3.5-4.5G VR lenses hitting the used market very soon - this is the lens included in the soon-to-end D600 bundle that B & H, Adorama, etc have been selling. Buyers are going to keep the D600 body and trade the 24-85 in towards something they really want. It's normally a $700 lens, and it's compatible with FX bodies should you decide to upgrade or sell it later.

I don't own this lens, so I have no comment on its performance. The DX factor gives you 36-105, so essentially the same as your older lens, but the AF will work on the 5100.
NurseRatched is offline  
Old Jan 1, 2013, 1:22 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Finland
Programs: Almost anything with six to twelve steps...
Posts: 1,033
Originally Posted by anrkitec
16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S DX II.

At an equivalent 24-105 it is Nikon's best DX single-lens option and unlike most superzooms is actually very good at the 16 end with relatively low, simple-type distortion, low CA, etc. Also, the second-generation VR makes the relatively slow max aperture on the long end much less of an issue.

At ~$600 it is IMO a bargain
The 16-85 is all that, a very nice lens, indeed. Unfortunately, at 480 grams it is not much lighter than the 18-200, which weighs 560 grams. The 80 gram difference (less than 3 oz) is not much and, IMO, not reason enough to switch.

As far as I recall, one of the few zooms significantly lighter than the 18-200 is the 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 which weighs 205 grams. However, with this lens you loose a LOT of focal range. However, as the price of this lens is only $99, it is not a big investment (just keep it in mind that the image quality is not as good as either of the lenses above).

If weight is your primary concern, a DSLR might not be your ideal camera. Mirrorless cameras or a high-end compact might work better.

Cheers,
T.
Thalassa is offline  
Old Jan 1, 2013, 3:52 pm
  #5  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
Posts: 31,185
Originally Posted by Thalassa
The 16-85 is all that, a very nice lens, indeed. Unfortunately, at 480 grams it is not much lighter than the 18-200, which weighs 560 grams. The 80 gram difference (less than 3 oz) is not much and, IMO, not reason enough to switch.
The weight difference is IMO not insignificant - particularly when you consider that the 16-85 is not only lighter in absolute terms but it makes the camera/lens combination much less front-heavy than the 18-200 and thus easier on the neck to carry around all day.

More importantly though - at least IMO - is that you gain a lot on the wide angle side. I think that in most travel-type photo situations people will/can benefit more from having a quality wide angle option and less from a longer telephoto - that is that I suspect that the OP will benefit more from having the 24-30 [effective] range than they will lose in going from 300-120 [effective] range on the long end.
anrkitec is offline  
Old Jan 1, 2013, 9:49 pm
  #6  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Programs: Krisflyer
Posts: 183
Do you really need the zoom? What are you going to be zooming in on?

I have the D90 and I mainly use the 35mm Nikkor DX lens, which is cheap, and great for portraits and wide stuff. It goes down to f1.8 for strong DOF control too. Plus it's small and super light.

What would you need 85mm+ for? Are you photographing animals or birds etc?
ozdude is offline  
Old Jan 2, 2013, 5:37 am
  #7  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: NYC / MIA / AMS
Programs: UA 1k
Posts: 500
Can't you take the D90 w/ the 35-105mm Lens. It gives you everything but the Wide angle, and you get auto focus.

If you wanted to you could pickup:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...AF_Nikkor.html to give yourself a bit wider angle. But I have a prime lens problem.

Alternatively, you could rent the 16-85mm lens suggested above for your trip:

http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/niko...s/normal-range
oblisk is offline  
Old Jan 2, 2013, 4:10 pm
  #8  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Northwest NJ
Programs: Starwood Platinum,Marriott Platinum, United Silver
Posts: 2,313
Smile

Originally Posted by oblisk
Can't you take the D90 w/ the 35-105mm Lens. It gives you everything but the Wide angle, and you get auto focus.

If you wanted to you could pickup:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...AF_Nikkor.html to give yourself a bit wider angle. But I have a prime lens problem.

Alternatively, you could rent the 16-85mm lens suggested above for your trip:

http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/niko...s/normal-range
BINGO! Can't believe I didn't think of that. Sure, the D90 is heavier than the 5100 but as another poster wrote, it's the lack of balance that makes the larger lens tough to travel with. Many thanks. ^
stevens397 is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.