Help with Nikon D80 companion lens to my Nikon 18-70?

Question

I would like a zoom lens to use while traveling, my kids' sport events, indoor performances, etc. I have the 18-70 lens and I am learning dSLR techniques after years of being a point and shooter. I would like to stay south of the $500 range but if needed can go to $750.
I do not plan to use a tripod and will be traveling with the additional lens so weight has some factor (image quality has higher priority)

I understand that faster shutter is better but not what is fast enough.

I have a short list by just searching J&R website. Your suggestions from this list or another are appreciated.


Nikon (2156) 55-200 F4-5.6 (~ $170),

Nikon (2161) 70-300 F4.5-5.6 VR (~$600),

Tamron (AF017N-300) 70-300 F4-5.6 (~$200),

Tamron (672D) 75-300 F4-5.6 (~$150),

Sigma (NH28-300) 28-300 F3.5-6.3 (~$280),

Thanks,

Answer 1

As long as you said you can go as high as $750, consider the popular Nikon 18-200 VR lens and leave the 18-70 home with your tripod. Okay, it's not the world's PERFECT lens, but it is not too shabby. Go here and read Rockwell's review:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18200.htm

Go here and look at the sample images. Click on them to view them full screen. If you click at least once in the white space, your cursor will turn into a magnifier when you scroll it back over the image. Click again over the image and it will zoom to 100% size so you can really examine the image.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18200/examples/index.htm

I suggest this lens because it's not too much bigger than the 18-70, but it adds quite a bit of reach and you will find that you just won't have to change lenses for your stated subjects. The 10 MP of the D80 will allow plenty of cropping if you can't get quite as full an image as you'd like.

The Nikon 70-300 can zoom in closer, obviously, but then you will have to carry at least 2 lenses, as 70 mm is already a moderate telephoto on your D80. The 18-200 is also a stop and a half faster, which is significant, although I doubt it is actually any faster in the 70-200 range.

I own both lenses (18-70 and 18-200) so I am speaking from experience for a change instead of just passing along things I've read elsewhere.

Answer 2

I like the suggestions for the 18-200mm VR and the 70-300mm VR. The 18-200 could be partially financed by selling your 18-70. (You can't beat the 18-200mm as an all-in-one lens.) All of the 3rd party lenses you mention are 'cheap reach'. They don't meet your quality & performance requirements.

If image quality is really your top priority, and for low light and sports, I'd strongly consider the (discontinued) Nikon 80-200mm. At 200mm, this constant f/2.8 AF zoom allows a 4x faster shutter speed than any of the other lenses. This extra speed trumps Vibration Reduction by a mile. A fast shutter time and VR will both mitigate camera shake (in lieu of a tripod), but only a fast shutter time will freeze the action. None of the other lenses can match the 80-200mm for image quality either. This is an old pro lens that was replaced by the current $1600 70-200mm f/2.8.

The 80-200mm AF came in several versions over the years and they were all very good. The most recent version - with a twist ring for the zoom instead of a push/pull ring - was the best of them all and comes close to your maximum budget. The older versions are cheaper. It should be possible to find a copy for around $500.

The trade off is weight. Like I said, the 80-200 was a pro lens... and that includes the build quality. This is not the kind of lens you want to carry around all day for a couple of snapshots.

For reviews of Nikon zooms, Ken Rockwell's site is generally very good - the one than Alan M liks to - but Ken's been known to be way off the mark. Double check his version of the facts here: http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_zoom_00.html

Answer 3

I think there are really two great options here for expanding your lens collection.

The Nikon 18-200mm VR is a great lens. Light, sharp, and it has VR. If you end up with this, you will no longer need or want your 18-70.

The other option that would be more of a complement to the 18-70mm is the 70-300mm VR. If you have the money, I would definatly go for this over the non VR version. This lens has a long enough reach for sports, as well as high speed focusing to keep up with moving subjects. As with the 18-200, VR will help with your handholding.

I would NOT go with the 55-200 as it really isn't long enough.
The sigma that you have listed would not be recomended as it is not fast enough at the 300mm end for what your posible uses are.

Another option that is just a great lens to own is the Nikon 50mm f/1.8.
At just about $100, this is the BEST value in Nikon lenses.
With a fast aperture of f/1.8 it will open you to the realm of low light photography.
It is nice and compact, I can fit mine in a pocket.
It is very sharp, maybe even one of Nikon's sharpest lenses, it is the one that they use for all camera tests.
If you purchase a close up filter, this lens has some basic macro capabilities.

Although it doesn't fit any of your requirements, it is a good lens to have and I urge you to consider it at some point.

Another good resource to gather opinions is a website called nikonians.org
its the largest nikon community on the web, with over 30,000 members (I think). Take advantage of the knowledge of the group.

Answer 4

My husband uses a Promaster 28-300 for EVERYTHING -- it's the only lens he takes on vacations and they turn out great! It's been great on the soccer field, too. Remember that 300 translates to 450 (multiply the mm by about 1.5) with the digital camera vs. a film camera and that should be sufficient for all of your needs, without going to a longer lens and needing image stabilization. We leave the 18-70 lens at home. Hope this helps!