D5100 user...fall in!! Part Two
- Thread starter Reno
- Start date
i 2nd this!
The gap between the 55-300mm and 70-300mm quite big lol. I bought the 55-300mm as it has quite good build quality with metal mount. Focusing speed is not very fast but I most shoot static or slow moving objects so I don't mind.
GReddyZC76
New Member
I rather save a bit bit bit more.. Get the 70-200 F/2.8G VRII..... More more even worth the $ :lol:
Reno said:
Capricornian
New Member
oh. well, 70-200mm is definitely a great one just by looking at price tag. 
but first I hv budget constraint. second, I just started my photography. I might need that if I m that serious enough. I m getting 35mm f1.8g as for my 2nd lens. I ve seen many posts comparing this to sigma 30mm. anyone wanna share d exp with me how u prefer which performance on our D5100? thanks in advance.
but first I hv budget constraint. second, I just started my photography. I might need that if I m that serious enough. I m getting 35mm f1.8g as for my 2nd lens. I ve seen many posts comparing this to sigma 30mm. anyone wanna share d exp with me how u prefer which performance on our D5100? thanks in advance.Capricornian said:oh. well, 70-200mm is definitely a great one just by looking at price tag.
I'm using the 35mm 1.8g myself n i find it wonderful for a walkabout lens as well as portrait. Its also not too tight for indoors.....
Adryan Fazly
New Member
Yup.. I would second that.. I am currently using 50mm 1.8 hence framing a bit tight.. But its a good distance to work with on portraits.. Distortion is not really a problem.. Planning to get the 35mm 1.8 next.. Sigma 30mm if u are refering to 1.4 then i would say its bokehlicious.. But much more costly too.. U may want to check up on its focusing issues..
if 70-300mm VR, i rather get the 70-200mm F2.8 VRII :bsmilie:
It's definately worth the weight. This picture which i have posted before will do the just
@70mm
@200mm
But i'm sure with good light, 70-300mm vr can achieve that too.
@70mm
@200mm
But i'm sure with good light, 70-300mm vr can achieve that too.
But here is just depend you want carry heavy weight like tank or lighter lens
2.8 with VR2 is good, due to expansive cost.
mds80 said:
Yes trying to poison u haha. Invest on lens is better than investing on expensive body. It will likely improve the image quality then having a better camera. Depreciating value is much lower too. Unless u have extra cash, get all good lens + good camera (d800?).
:what: lol...at least it's something worth saving up for
Similar threads
