Everyday lens with a D5000 (Or Any DX Camera)?

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

Everyday lens with a D5000 (Or Any DX Camera)?

(59 posts) (30 voices)

Tags:

« Previous 123 Next »

studio460

preferred member
Joined: May '10
Posts: 1,231
offline

It looks like the OP has made up his/her mind, but at least personally, I don't find having two slow zooms the best choice, at least creatively. But it's clear the OP is looking for range, so, far be it for me to say what people "need." However, even pairing one slow zoom, with one fast normal, or a fast short-telephoto, I think, is just way more fun. When I carry only two lenses for just "walking-around," I typically carry one wide, and something fast (in any combination):

Pair No. 1:

A. AF VR Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G DX
B. AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8

Pair No. 2:

A. Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 DX
B. AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

(or, vice-versa)

Today, I just happened to bring along "pair no. 1" to work. Nevertheless, I would still highly recommend adding, at the very least, an AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D to your kit. At only $115 USD, they're incredibly affordable, extremely sharp, and plenty fast.

Posted 2 years ago #
kanuck

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,405
offline

The 18-200mm VR Nikkor is pure magic and really should be the everyday lens for anything DX. People say it does nothing spectacular but I had an unreal sample for D300 back when I was still shooting DX and the combo was excellent. The VR1 has dropped in price now as well thanks to the VRII I believe. 18-200mm VR I gets my vote hands down!

Posted 2 years ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

kanuck said:
The 18-200mm VR Nikkor is pure magic and really should be the everyday lens for anything DX. People say it does nothing spectacular but I had an unreal sample for D300 back when I was still shooting DX and the combo was excellent. The VR1 has dropped in price now as well thanks to the VRII I believe. 18-200mm VR I gets my vote hands down!

I don't think there's anything different really other than a zoom lock between the first version and the second.

The only thing that's really stopping me from getting an 18-200 would be the 70-300 VR. Hear it's amazing, and I already have an 18-135 already.

Posted 2 years ago #
RichJB

senior member
Joined: Sep '09
Posts: 54
offline

I have the Nikon 18-200 VR first edition and also the 70-300 VR. both are great lenses IMHO. I was going to buy a 16-85VR and compared the results against my 18-200 to see if it was better, I was disappointed in it optically.I know this seems to go against what most say. Incedentally, my 18-200 is sharp at 18 and 200 mm from wide open until about f11; the weak spot optically is around 100-135mm.

I tried a couple sigma lenses over the last few years and was very disappointed with the resolution, my first macro was the 105 Sigma (dire), also tried a 10-20 which I returned after one month. Invariably there are good and poor lenses and I suggest that the OP go and try some out and compare them against each other both optically and for ease of use.

Posted 2 years ago #
kanuck

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,405
offline

Try to get a good sample of the 18-200 though. I had a brand new one and thought it was optically perfect. Then I had a chance at getting a used but mint 35mm Zeiss ZF lens so I flipped it for it. Then I went back and got a used 18-200mm 2 months later and was disappointed with this sample. The 70-300mm is great as advertised I dumped my 70-200mm VR 1 and replaced it for the weight. I paid cash for the 70-300mm and traded the 70-200 for a 24-70 which I use a lot more I find.

Posted 2 years ago #
safrica

new member
Joined: Jul '10
Posts: 4
offline

Hi All,

I am newcomer to this camera forum posting business. I landed up here because I have been interested in buying a DSLR and after agonizing over it for ages finally bought a D5000. I have wanted to return it 5 times since I bought it but eventually decided that my reasons for buying this camera are still sound.
I now am interested in the lenses and here starts a whole new set of dillemas. Should I get the 18-200vr or the 18-105vr with the 70-300vr? What I have discovered is that there is no real answer.
Truth is the 18-55 lens that I took out for the first time this weekend did a fantastic job. Most people say it takes better quality pics than the 18-200 and doesn't cost as much. I think I will stick with this lens now and just buy the 70-300vr for going on safari.
My only question is if the point of photography is to get the best picture possible and to enjoy the art of it why does a person settle for inferior quality like the long range zoom lens such as the 18-200? Isn't part of the fun picking the best lens for the job?

Posted 2 years ago #
heartyfisher

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,701
offline

welcome safrica.

You have answered your own question ! :-) "Isn't part of the fun picking the best lens for the job?"

The 18-200 IS the best lens for the "job" for many people. it really depend on what the "job" is.

Glad you are enjoying the 18-55. Its a lovely little lense. Use it until you find its limitations then decide what other lenses you want.

Posted 2 years ago #
Krevlin

preferred member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 316
offline

safrica said:
My only question is if the point of photography is to get the best picture possible and to enjoy the art of it why does a person settle for inferior quality like the long range zoom lens such as the 18-200? Isn't part of the fun picking the best lens for the job?

I almost bought the 18-200VR. My reasoning was I needed it as a walk around lens. I work in downtown Chicago and bring my cameras with me everywhere, so there are many picture opportunities just walking around. I own the 18-55VR that came with my D60 and bought the 55-200VR. Both great lenses but when walking around I'd have to switch between the two. No big deal. Until you have to switch every few blocks. Also switching in public isn't so easy and stopping to switch lenses become a hassle.

However I could not justify spending that much money on a slow lens and ended up getting a Tokina 16-50mm f/2.8. The 18-200 wasn't worth it, for the little convenience. Now I just mount the 55-200VR on my D60 and have my Tokina 16-50 f/2.8 on my D90.

Posted 2 years ago #
Dennis

new member
Joined: Jul '10
Posts: 3
offline

I'm hoping someone can help. I have the D5000 and I also have a Tamron AF Aspherical LD DiII 19-250 3.5 - 6.3 lens. My problem is that the auto focus is not working when this len is connected to the D5000, but work fine on Nikon D80.

I have another len Sigma 150-500 f5-6.3 APO DG OS that works fine on the D5000.

Any input?

Posted 2 years ago #
PB PM

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 2,217
offline

Is the 18-250mm screw driven? Meaning, do you hear the body focus motor working on the D80 when you have it on that camera?

Posted 2 years ago #
Dennis

new member
Joined: Jul '10
Posts: 3
offline

Yes... I can hear the motor on the D80 when auto focusing.

Posted 2 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

You don't have to post this same question in more than one thread Dennis.
Look for lenses that are AF-S compatible. Your Tamron is just AF so it doesn't have an autofocus motor so it won't autofocus on the D5000 but will on the D80.

Posted 2 years ago #
PB PM

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 2,217
offline

Maybe, everything I can find out about that lens says it has a Tamron BIM (Built in motor), but maybe that is a newer version?

Posted 2 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

Yeah the older version was AF-D compatible.

Posted 2 years ago #
kyoshinikon

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 1,200
offline

You replaced a D80 with a D5000?

Posted 2 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

What's wrong with that?

Posted 2 years ago #
kyoshinikon

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 1,200
offline

It's exactly like replacing with a D300 with a D90. You lose many controls and only gain a few features not seen on the older model... For some it works but it still seems kinda odd.

Posted 2 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

Well I think being able to shoot HD video is a huge gain for some people. And besides he still has the D80.

Posted 2 years ago #
PB PM

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 2,217
offline

Not to mention that the matrix metering on the D5000 is much better than on the D80.

Posted 2 years ago #
heartyfisher

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,701
offline

I have been considering picking up a D5000 too .. almost pulled the trigger last month.. still might... to replace my D200 clone S5pro. Well really to tide me over till the D300s replacement comes along.

Posted 2 years ago #
DaveyJ

preferred member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 452
offline

I shoot with D90, D300, and D700 many days. I finally bought a D90 myself as I had been recommending the camera for so long and many of my friends were buying it on my say so and then asking questions that it just made it easier to use one more myself. Another reason I bought it as after i had helped so many set up their rigs i began to realize that the D90 had features I liked a lot and besides it made a great small field camera. I used the 18-105VR kit lens as I had been really impressed how well that lens does within its range. If I was going to demand 70-300VR type wildlife, or performance sports use I would suggest the 18-105VR lens. But that is two lenses. Now on that camera I just leave the 18-200VR lens on it as it is frankly an amazing lens. There are times I put on a Micro Nikkor as up close it will beat a 18-200VR. This does leave the increasingly expert user which you may well become with the realization that there is no perfect lens. I have photographed with lens which cost thousands more than the 18-200VR lens. The actual shots taken under real life conditions make the 18-200VR look like a great purchase. BUT if you had to say that shooting it compared to the 18-105VR within that range....then I see no appreciable difference. I owned some of the more expensive 2.8 zooms and felt they were too heavy. When the D400 and the D90 REPLACEMENT arrives they will be awesome cameras. But it is very wise to look very close at good NIKKOR glass. I have seen many friends buy other brand aftermarket lens and within two years they were broke and would not take photos. In my experience Nikon lenses keep on working for MANY years. Two lenses you should really look close at are the 70-300VR and the 16-85VR. If I have had my doubts about ONE NIKON lens it would be the 18-55VR. Within its range it is very good. The problem is that everyone I know who use it are always wishing it had more range. I'd always take the 18-105VR lens over the 18-55!!!

Posted 2 years ago #
miatadan

member
Joined: Oct '09
Posts: 38
offline

I am using the D5000 as well ( waiting for D300s replacement or D700 replacement)
My everyday lens is the Nikkor DX AF-S 35mm F1.8
I chose this as it is close to same focal length as 50mm is on FX cameras and for better low light performance. For a zoom lens , I am saving for new Nikkor AF-S 16-35 F4G VR.
Everyone needs are different.

Dan

Posted 2 years ago #
shuagster

member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 15
offline

Hello again. It has been 3 months since I started this thread and no, I have not made a decision and I have not made any purchases. So I come back a bit more informed in the field of Photography being that when I first posted I had just been gifted my D5000 and did not really know much. 3 months ago I didn't really know what I needed or even what I wanted, now I have realized that what I want and need is a lens to complement the 18-55VR that I already have and I want to know if I should go with the cheaper and lighter 55-200VR or go with the 70-300VR, I don't really mind the price difference as I am only beginning to save for this purchase. Also if you know about any rumored updates on these two lenses, I can wait. I am also considering getting a prime lens for low light, I am strongly considering the Nikon 50mm 1.8 but I am open to suggestions.

Posted 2 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

Please do a forum search as those lenses have all been covered NUMEROUS times. They are all good lenses an it just depends on YOU and what YOUR needs are.

Posted 2 years ago #
shuagster

member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 15
offline

Hey Niko, sorry if I annoy you with my Noob posts, I'm just a beginner photographer trying to get deeper into the field and Yes, I have read other posts about the lenses, but what I'm really looking for is input from more experienced people who could help make my decision easier.

Sincerely, Shuagster

Posted 2 years ago #