18-135 to 18-200 VR??

[psychobiologist]

ok i m seeing both your pictures right now.

I see your problem. you are being limited by the dynamic range of the camera, i.e. you have a subject in shadow, but the sky's very bright and well lit. If the shadow is well exposed, the sky is over-exposed. The sky- properly exposed, the shadows under-exposed.

if i were you, i'll PS the second picture a little, probably lift the shadows by 10% (no more than that, else will be too fake), and play with the curves a little.

 

[psychobiologist]

an alternative for you is to do HDR, take 3 shots in bracketing, and then combine under photomatix

 

[mrbinks76]

you can try using a ND grad filter for such situations also.. where the sky is bright but you want to expose properly for foreground...

 

[Xiao_shin]

There is a rumour about a 16-85mm VR being release soon.
Could you wait for that before making a decision?

 

[fergo]

There is a rumour about a 16-85mm VR being release soon.
Could you wait for that before making a decision?

ya.. read it somewhere CS. but i dun have much time left in Singapore man.. goin overseas for one year for training soon. wanna get the proper stuff before goin over. just gotten a SB-600. so now looking a relatively good lens. have 18-135mm n a 50mm. so now dun know which to get. either 17-50 f2.8 or 18-200mm VR.

scared get the 17-50mm den cannot get the reach. on the other hand, getting the 18-200mm abit stupid. its like over-riding the 18-135mm.

 

[psychobiologist]

ya.. read it somewhere CS. but i dun have much time left in Singapore man.. goin overseas for one year for training soon. wanna get the proper stuff before goin over. just gotten a SB-600. so now looking a relatively good lens. have 18-135mm n a 50mm. so now dun know which to get. either 17-50 f2.8 or 18-200mm VR.

scared get the 17-50mm den cannot get the reach. on the other hand, getting the 18-200mm abit stupid. its like over-riding the 18-135mm.

getting a new lens doesnt solve the problem that you have highlighted though, that is limited by the dynamic range of the camera in some scenarios.

your best best is either to use an graduated ND, or do a HDR, like i had done for a few scenery shots before

 

[fergo]

getting a new lens doesnt solve the problem that you have highlighted though, that is limited by the dynamic range of the camera in some scenarios.

your best best is either to use an graduated ND, or do a HDR, like i had done for a few scenery shots before

HDR can only be done in RAW format right? i wan to get the 18-200mm for a better coverage so i can make it a "multi-purpose" lens. 135mm cant get the reach at times. furthermore, the 18-200mm got VR so hope it helps a little.

 

[psychobiologist]

HDR can only be done in RAW format right? i wan to get the 18-200mm for a better coverage so i can make it a "multi-purpose" lens. 135mm cant get the reach at times. furthermore, the 18-200mm got VR so hope it helps a little.

nope, jpg also can!

check out photomatix

 

[fergo]

nope, jpg also can!

check out photomatix

okok.. thats great. Read in Digital SLR User magazine, they use RAW. haha.. thanks

 

[Yatlapball]

luminous-landscapes.com is as good a place as any to start... great resource.

 

[fergo]

luminous-landscapes.com is as good a place as any to start... great resource.

thanks bro..

 

[Yatlapball]

Your welcome I started out completely clueless too and self-taught through reading CS (haha ) and going through all those websites.

 

[fergo]

Your welcome I started out completely clueless too and self-taught through reading CS (haha ) and going through all those websites.

ya man.. i guess most of us did the same way u did!! tons of reading thats for sure..

 

[nikonnewbie]

ya.. read it somewhere CS. but i dun have much time left in Singapore man.. goin overseas for one year for training soon. wanna get the proper stuff before goin over. just gotten a SB-600. so now looking a relatively good lens. have 18-135mm n a 50mm. so now dun know which to get. either 17-50 f2.8 or 18-200mm VR.

scared get the 17-50mm den cannot get the reach. on the other hand, getting the 18-200mm abit stupid. its like over-riding the 18-135mm.

I think you cant really compare the 18-135 and 18-200 based on reach alone. The 18-200VR is a far superior lens to the kit lens and I think is a very worthwhile purchase.

 

[fergo]

I think you cant really compare the 18-135 and 18-200 based on reach alone. The 18-200VR is a far superior lens to the kit lens and I think is a very worthwhile purchase.

in wat sense? 18-200m got further reach and same aperture range. but of course with an additional of the VR. would getting both the 18-200 VR and 17-50 f2.8 be ideal?

my idea of getting those two is the 18-200mm to upgrade from 18-135mm and the 17-50 f2.8 to shoot low light conditions especially indoors. as for the f2.8, i'm considering Sigma's 18-50mm, Tamron's 17-50mm or Tokina's 16-50mm. all is f2.8.

heard alot about Tamron, some got prob with sending wrong info to flash etc. Sigma and Tokina not sure. any comments?

 

[chalkie]

Get a book. Or google "Correct Exposure". There are probably more detailed (and clearer) explanations.

Order the book "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Petersen.

QUOTE]

 

[Override2Zion]

...i think a lens with VR would be beneficial. but on the other hand, i find it quite ridiculous to get a 18-200mm when i have a 18-135mm. any comments? also thought of getting Tamron's 17-50mm f/2.8 but afraid i cant get the reach i wan.

A suggestion would be to sell your 18-135mm (around SGD$600 brand new, check B&S for 2nd hand pricing) and top up around SGD$750 and get the 18-200VR, this way you won't have lenses that duplicates those ranges. The Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 cost around SGD$600+ in singapore so the price difference to acquire either lenses ain't that huge. You get good image quality and faster shutter speeds with the 17-50mm at f/2.8 but you get better reach with the 18-200 VR. Depends on what you wanna shoot, you have to choose. If you want something general its about compromise.

 

[conquer500]

A suggestion would be to sell your 18-135mm (around SGD$600 brand new, check B&S for 2nd hand pricing) and top up around SGD$750 and get the 18-200VR, this way you won't have lenses that duplicates those ranges. The Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 cost around SGD$600+ in singapore so the price difference to acquire either lenses ain't that huge. You get good image quality and faster shutter speeds with the 17-50mm at f/2.8 but you get better reach with the 18-200 VR. Depends on what you wanna shoot, you have to choose. If you want something general its about compromise.

i would choose the nikon 18-135 over the two other lens.

price, reach and performance its better.

 

[Override2Zion]

i would choose the nikon 18-135 over the two other lens.

price, reach and performance its better.

Actually it is really subjective and depends on what the buyer shoots and how he/she shoots.

Price wise : Nikkor AF-S 18-135 / Tamron AF 17-50 (Both quite close)

Reach wise: 18-200 wins

Performance: Depends

For people who dun like lugging tripods around, 18-200 is the better choice (VR advantage), especially for those who like shooting at the telephoto end (eg 135mm), VR would be good help. As for IQ wise, i ain't too sure, i used to own the 18-135 and now the 18-200VR but haven't really done a side by side comparison. Also you get better DOF control with constant widest aperture of f/2.8 on the Tamron over ranges 17-50mm.