Which lens would be the better bet?

[JoeyF]

Hi all!

I recently got a Nikon D3000 as my first DSLR, and it came with an 18-55mm VR AF-S lens. The camera is working great, but I also need a good zoom-telephoto lens. I'm looking at two different lenses, but I'm having difficulty making a final decision.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/486717-USA/Nikon_2166_AF_S_DX_VR_Zoom_Nikkor.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/207359-USA/Nikon_1928_AF_Zoom_Nikkor_70_300mm.html

Now obviously, the 70-300mm will be able to provide more zoom, and is cheaper. However, the 55-200mm has built in vibration reduction, which is a tempting feature for me.

I typically do a lot of outdoor photography, so I imagine the shutter speed would be fast enough where any vibration wouldn't be picked up. However, I was wondering if the camera would be more sensitive to vibration at the higher focal lengths (250 to 300mm). In addition, I occasionally do some indoor photography (sometimes when flash is not allowed), so the shutter speed would be significantly slower. I also rarely use a tripod unless I'm doing long exposure shots.

So I'm wondering if in my situation would the higher focal length of the 70-300mm lens outweighs the loss of the VR function.

On a side note - I'm aware that the 70-300mm lens won't autofocus on the D3000. I've been using manual focus since about two days after I got the camera, so the lack of autofocus isn't really a con for me.

[Draconian Guppy]

Well it all boils down to:

Longer Focal length or VR

For shiny outdoors @ 300mm isn't a problem, but for a grar day non vr 300mm will probably be slow and blurry ( unless you up teh ISO ).

I'd go for longer focal length. In the end, you can place the camera on a tripod, but you can't add an extra 100mm to a 200mm.

[lawtai]

If you're only choosing between those 2 lenses, I'd go with the 55-200. If you'd be willing to get the 70-300VR lens, then I'd suggest going for that one. The 70-300VR is around $550 though. I have the 55-200VR right now and it's definitely a great lens when I have good lighting. I am looking to also get a 70-300VR lens though just for the extra reach.

[Kerm]

I typically do a lot of outdoor photography, so I imagine the shutter speed would be fast enough where any vibration wouldn't be picked up. However, I was wondering if the camera would be more sensitive to vibration at the higher focal lengths (250 to 300mm). In addition, I occasionally do some indoor photography (sometimes when flash is not allowed), so the shutter speed would be significantly slower. I also rarely use a tripod unless I'm doing long exposure shots.

As a rule of thumb it's always good to have 1/focal length for your shutter speed to cut blur.

So focal length of 70mm try to have at least 1/70 sec. Focal length of 300mm try to have 1/300 sec. shutter speed.

[Argote]

Why not get this: http://www.bhphotovi...0mm_f_2_8G.html

Haha, jokes aside, you should also consider this: http://www.bhphotovi...5_6_APO_DG.html It'll give you AF and 1:2 "Macro"

Oh, and the exact same 70-300 lens you posted is also listed at a lower price http://www.bhphotovi...r_70_300mm.html

[Draconian Guppy]

As a rule of thumb it's always good to have 1/focal length for your shutter speed to cut blur.

So focal length of 70mm try to have at least 1/70 sec. Focal length of 300mm try to have 1/300 sec. shutter speed.

Did not know that! (Y) (Y)

Why not get this: http://www.bhphotovi...0mm_f_2_8G.html

Haha, jokes aside, you should also consider this: http://www.bhphotovi...5_6_APO_DG.html It'll give you AF and 1:2 "Macro"

Oh, and the exact same 70-300 lens you posted is also listed at a lower price http://www.bhphotovi...r_70_300mm.html

Wow

$ 2,299.00 And not even free shipping :p

+1 on the Sigma

[sask]

Having owned the 55-200 VR for about a year an a half, it's a great lens. I think our situations are a bit different, but I can try and help. I personally would never buy a zoom lens without VR. It is really really helpful for getting nice sharp shots without a tripod (most occasions). So, for the VR reason alone, I would go with the 55-200 VR over the 70-300. However, if you do like to do a lot of outdoor photography, the 300mm might come in handy. You can always move closer I guess. I think the ability to autofocus would be nice to have though too. Anyway, good luck with you search.

Here's a couple "outdoor" sets on flickr I shot with only my 55-200 VR and D40.

Gallery - Frozen Morning

Gallery - Marina

[lawtai]

I also agree that autofocus is definitely a plus to have. While I'm sure you can get by without it, it makes things a lot simpler and you'll have one less thing to worry about when trying to capture your image.

[JoeyF]

Thanks for all the advice guys. I've decided on the Sigma. Until this afternoon I was leaning towards the 200mm VR, but then I went up to a local shop to pick up a camera bag and the guy pointed out a rather good fact to me:

VR is only useful in low light situations, such as being indoors (I already knew that), but chances are if you're indoors you're taking a picture of someone/something in action, in which case VR wouldn't do much anyway.

I knew that VR didn't do much for action, but I never actually put two-and-two together and realized that in most situations where you'd need VR, it wouldn't work anyway. So with that in mind, Sigma it is. Thanks everyone!

[sundayx Veteran]

I also agree that autofocus is definitely a plus to have. While I'm sure you can get by without it, it makes things a lot simpler and you'll have one less thing to worry about when trying to capture your image.

?

[JoeyF]

Actually, could anyone tell me the difference between the Sigma lens and this one:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/550953-REG/Tamron_AF017NII_700_70_300mm_f_4_5_6_Di_LD.html#features

They both have the same range, a macro switch, and AF compatible with the D3000, but the Tamron is $40 cheaper. Is there any advantage the Sigma would have over the Tamron?

[Draconian Guppy]

Sigma

58mm

f/Stop Range

4-22/5.6-32

Minimum Focus Distance

59.7" (37.4" in macro)

Magnification

1:2 (in macro)

Zoom/Focus Control

Two-Touch

Angle of View

34-8°

Groups/Elements

10/14

Length

4.7" (119mm)

Maximum Diameter

2.9" (74mm)

Weight

1.3 lb (584g)

TamronFilter Size

62mm

f/Stop Range

4-22

Minimum Focus Distance

4.9' (1.5 m)

3.1' (0.95 m) in macro mode

Maximum Magnification

1:2

Angle of View

34 to 8°

Groups/Elements

13/9

Length

4.6" (117mm)

Maximum Diameter

3" (76mm)

Weight

1 lb (458g)

For specs, you'll notice "groups/elements" on the Sigma is 14/10, probably glass/blades elements IIRC, more glass inside and/or higher quality glass. I for one owned that exact same tamron, feels cheap like hell, BUT gets the job done. Sharpness @ 300mm is NOT tack sharp, but with proper post processing it give out nice images (again @300m). In the end, you get Cheap and long reach :)

There several lens review sites eg. dpreview that you can check out ( not sure if they have that specific sigma lens, but hey, google is teh limit)

[Argote]

Sigma also has the non-APO version which is cheaper but many people claim the APO version is much better.

[lawtai]

?

He mentioned in his beginning post that the 70-300 didn't autofocus with his D3000.