Typical Lens Question...

[s1221ljc]

I was referring to the 17-55mm f2.8 & also the 24-70mm f2.8. Third party lens I have never nor will ever touch & cannot therefore personally recommend it to others, nevermind if they are cheaper. Bumping up ISO 1-2 stops will not make the world collapse & to me its acceptable under certain conditions. In any case thats why I included the 24mm f2.8 to cover low light captures if that is important & as backup too. The f2.8 alone wont work miracles & if TS like he can even can get the cheaper f1.8 primes. Not everyone favours zoom particularly in low light & the Tamron is just a cheap alternative to the equivalent Nikon but not equal nor surpass it. Primes may seem impractical for some but for the experienced, they may be indispensible & perfectly suited to the tasks (anyway how often does one keep taking pics of kids running around non stop in extreme low light?). My recommendations are based on my own experiences & strictly my opinion, as was asked by TS here, & it is not a advice that must be followed by anyone.

Not all f2.8 zooms are that expensive. The Tamron 17-50 f2.8 non-VC is cheaper than the Nikon 18-200 VR1 and VR2. Indoors, the tele range is seldom ever needed. And, f3.5 is only at 18mm, which is seldom useful for shooting people. Once you zoom, the aperture gets smaller, causing you to bump your ISO way up, degrading image quality. Even when software can remove noise, it will soften the image.

For travels, the 18-200 is definitely a very good lens, but for shooting kids, especially indoors, a f2.8 zoom with fast focusing and subject tracking is essential.

 

[brapodam]

I was referring to the 17-55mm f2.8 & also the 24-70mm f2.8. Third party lens I have never nor will ever touch & cannot therefore personally recommend it to others, nevermind if they are cheaper. Bumping up ISO 1-2 stops will not make the world collapse & to me its acceptable under certain conditions. In any case thats why I included the 24mm f2.8 to cover low light captures if that is important & as backup too. The f2.8 alone wont work miracles & if TS like he can even can get the cheaper f1.8 primes. Not everyone favours zoom particularly in low light & the Tamron is just a cheap alternative to the equivalent Nikon but not equal nor surpass it. Primes may seem impractical for some but for the experienced, they may be indispensible & perfectly suited to the tasks (anyway how often does one keep taking pics of kids running around non stop in extreme low light?). My recommendations are based on my own experiences & strictly my opinion, as was asked by TS here, & it is not a advice that must be followed by anyone.

Bumping up the ISO from 400 to 1600 may not be a problem, but if I have to shoot at ISO 1600 at f2.8 at 50mm on the Tamron to get a decent shutter speed, bumping it up 1.5 stops (the 18-200 VR is f4.8 at 50mm), would mean that I'm now at ISO 5000 or something (It's Hi0.3 on my camera). No problem if I'm on a D3s, but with the D5000/D90 sensor, it produces mostly crap images with very dull colour.

It gets worse if the TS is on a D60...Only the 35mm f1.8, which is an excellent lens, will autofocus on his camera. The AF-D lenses will not, which means he can't get the 24/2.8. Not to mention he doesn't even have ISO above 3200 (or is it 1600?)

For me, I'd rather have a fast aperture third party lens than a slow Nikon lens. There are some third party lenses that surpass the originals, in fact, like some of the Sigma primes. Third party makers are not all crap, even Sigma seems to be improving with their focusing issues.

 

[junliang78]

you want big aperture, you want all rounder plus long reach, and you want below $1.3k.

I doubt Nikon or any third party lens manufactures can full fill all your need. be practical, pick one or two aspects which is most important to you.

:thumbsup:

 

[daredevil123]

There are some third party lenses that surpass the originals, in fact, like some of the Sigma primes. Third party makers are not all crap, even Sigma seems to be improving with their focusing issues.

Sigma 85/1.4. 50/1.4, 30/1.4

Just one thing to note, that Sigma usually do not have CRC in their wide primes. So when doing close focusing, users can usually experience some focus shift with some camera bodies. Totally work-aroundable... just that the user needs to know how.

 

[gonefishing]

I was referring to the 17-55mm f2.8 & also the 24-70mm f2.8. Third party lens I have never nor will ever touch & cannot therefore personally recommend it to others, nevermind if they are cheaper. Bumping up ISO 1-2 stops will not make the world collapse & to me its acceptable under certain conditions. In any case thats why I included the 24mm f2.8 to cover low light captures if that is important & as backup too. The f2.8 alone wont work miracles & if TS like he can even can get the cheaper f1.8 primes. Not everyone favours zoom particularly in low light & the Tamron is just a cheap alternative to the equivalent Nikon but not equal nor surpass it. Primes may seem impractical for some but for the experienced, they may be indispensible & perfectly suited to the tasks (anyway how often does one keep taking pics of kids running around non stop in extreme low light?). My recommendations are based on my own experiences & strictly my opinion, as was asked by TS here, & it is not a advice that must be followed by anyone.

Thanks for the good recommendation .....