where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
I want to have a close up (18 mm) for family photos and also a zoom lens for farther away subjects. I don't know if it's better to purchase the two lenses of nikon 18-105 vr ($360) and the nikon 70-300 vr ($520) or just purchase the one lens of nikon 18-200 vr ($750)?
If I purchase the two lenses it will cost me $880 which is more $130 than purchasing just the 18-200 mm vr lens.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
When I purchased a D60 two years ago, it came with a 18-55mm VR and a 55-200mm VR. I then sold the two lenses and purchased the 18-200 VR. It is a very convenient lens to have, and not having to switch lenses back and forth is wonderful, especially when traveling or taking photos outside. Though it's not necessarily a fast lens, it does provide sharp photos at almost any aperture. The 18-200 is heavier and bigger than either the 18-55 or the 55-200, but if I had the choice, I would definitely just purchase one 18-200 VR (or VRII).
I've since upgraded my D60 to a D90. I do have to tell you that I now use my 35mm f/1.8 prime 90% of the time and rarely use the 18-200.
18 is a bit too wide for family photos go ~24ish
i use to have 18-200 and its pretty good unless you need something specific or you r already on a ball and need more thn everyday combo lens can give you
the only downside for it is size
its slightly to big for run around lens (but thn again you can pick up 50mm or 35mm later on for really cheap if u need portability)
keep in mind that prices on lenses dont drop that much so if you decide that you want something different later on you dont loose that much at all...
do you really need the extra 100mm with the 70-300mm?? are you planning to shoot sports? wildlife? if you need a walk around lens stick with the 18-200mm unless you plan to shoot sports and such.
The 18-200 is a fantastic lens, you are very unlikely to miss a shot because you are changing lenes. the only other lens I use with my D90 is a 10-20. I have a 70 300 but use it about once a year
If you are going to shoot indoor family pictures I would suggest pairing the 18-200 with a flash also. Because the lens isn't fast it is hard to get good indoor pictures without cranking the ISO up. Even shooting sports and things are OK at 200, but you might not be as up close and personal as you would like. The two lens combo probably isn't a terrible idea, but you will only gain the 100 mm and the speed of the lenses won't be any different then the 18-200. As said above you won't need 18 for family photos, but it is necessary for landscapes.
There are so many what lenses should I buy threads. It is hard to give people advice because everyone is different. Rummer says he uses the 35 f1.8 all the time. I have the 18-200 and the 35 f1.8 and I keep putting my 18-200 back on. I don't think you would be disappointed with either setup. I personally would get the 18-200 and if you have the extra money also get a flash.
I'm a Bokeh and speed freak on lenses so the all-in-one lenses are not to my liking. Unlike Tcole1983 above, I will have a zoom on and always take it off for my 50,35, or 85. Goes to show none of us are the same here ;)
If you have the 18-105 and like it- keep that- it has a good range. I love my 70-300mmVR - one of the most underrated lenses Nikon makes. Add a 1.8 (50 or 35) and you are set to go.
You must log in to post.
