Another D50 ... Hello Nikkor 18-70 AF-S DX lens

[sameerrao]

Will someone pls break the Canon/Nikon drudgery here .... its equivalent to the sports car fan who only aspires to the Ferrari or Porsche. Where is the Corvette Z06 of cameras?

Anyway here is my one week old Nikon D50 with a Nikkor 12-24 DX ED wide-angle lens.



The Wide angle lens is awesome ... I took it to a Ferrari Club of America event this weekend and had a ball. The main intent of course is to use it when I go to state parks like Yosemite. But in regular photography it makes the pictures interesting in the widest angle shots with the intentional distortion

Here are a couple of pics that I took with the lens, camera combo:

[5vz-fe]

I agree, sometimes distortion could add freshness(hope I am not using to vauge of a word) to an object.

Got any more to show sameerrao or we have to wait for your other lens to show up at ur door?

[sameerrao]

I took a bunch of pics at the FCA event ... will post it soon

The 18-200 lens to which you refer isnt going to show up anytime soon. I think the waiting time is about a month or more. :shock: Boggles the mind ... looks like Nikon was caught unawares by its demand.

I am still debating whether I should buy it
Pros:
- VR
- Range
- Convenience
Cons:
- Slow lens for photographing racing cars

I wonder if the VR will sorta compensate for the slow lens .. hmmm.

[sentra_dude]

Congrats!

Glad to see another D50 owner on JW, that looks like a cool lens, keep posting pics! 8) 8) 8)

[dutchmasterflex]

Nice camera

I'm sure you can't wait for your 18-200mm. I think the VR should be able to help you out when taking pics of cars in motion. If it doesnt help you, it will jut make you just have to work a bit harder thats all..

the 12-24mm looks pretty nice.. i like the fisheye effect. If you dont mind me askin, how much did you end up paying for the combo?

[TT]

Congrats on your purchase! Actually I really don't see how somebody would want to buy something else than a Nikon or Canon when he goes reflex

[sameerrao]

Originally Posted by dutchmasterflex Nice camera I'm sure you can't wait for your 18-200mm. I think the VR should be able to help you out when taking pics of cars in motion. If it doesnt help you, it will jut make you just have to work a bit harder thats all.. the 12-24mm looks pretty nice.. i like the fisheye effect. If you dont mind me askin, how much did you end up paying for the combo?

About $1500 total - the lens is an expensive mofo.

[MartijnGizmo]

Why did you opt for the Nikkor 12-24 instead of the much cheaper Tokina 12-24?

Originally Posted by dutchmasterflex the 12-24mm looks pretty nice.. i like the fisheye effect. If you dont mind me askin, how much did you end up paying for the combo?

It's wide-angle, but no fisheye. It's corrected linear, whereas a fisheye is circular.

[sameerrao]

REad good reviews of the Nikkor lens over the Tokina. I believe the resale value of a Nikon lens is very good - so if I re-sell it I wouldnt lose much at all.

[sameerrao]

New Lens today:

OK I bought a lens today after a sleepless night of deciding what to buy and reviewing a couple sites for suitable lenses.

I went to the store and tried out the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 and Nikon 80-200 F2.8. The Nikon 70-200 F2.8 was way beyond my budget.

So after playing around the Sigma and the Nikon for a few minutes and changing my mind 10 times along the way, I picked the Sigma - it was about $200 cheaper and had a slightly faster autofocus. I am sure the Nikon lens may be a tad ahead on quality but I should be OK with the Sigma - read great reviews on it.

I guess I will use this for medium range shots and will later buy a Sigma 50-500 for the long range shots.

The 70-200 is a big bugger but not as heavy as I expected - a monopod/tripod is not that essential. Good exercise for me also.



Until the next purchase ... Adios

Here are three pics:

1. Flower from about 10 feet away with the lens set at 200mm and shutter at 1/1000 - nice picture isolation (bokeh?)

2. Top of the tree about 30 feet up with the lens shooting virtually straight up - the camera/lens combo was not shaking too much though I had to jam my left elbow into my body to steady it a bit

3. My backyard

I was looking for a bird or something to check the autofocus on but couldnt find any - they must be publicity shy ... aargh
4. A pic from the photo store - a dummy about 30 feet away

[dutchmasterflex]

Some more shots in Hi-res would be nice

I'm also thinking about getting a telezoom lens for my D50.. How much did you find the Sigma and Nikon lenses for? I would also like to see a couple VR lenses before I make a purchase.

[sameerrao]

Sigma is about $800 and the Nikon about $950 ... The Nikon 70-200 F2.8 with VR is a mindblowing $1600. Had to donate one kidney for the Sigma ...

I crunched the orig pics to put in Fchat. Sorry about that ...

Dont have too many good pics at full res ...



Here is a pic I took yesterday - my neighbor's cat with the 12-24 lens ... cute thing ...

[MartijnGizmo]

Ah, a 70-200 f/2.8 is always a nice adition. People complaining about the weight are too wimpy, I have no problems handholding it with my bad knee.

[dutchmasterflex]

Damn.. twice the price for the VR. Isnt the 18-200mm with VR under $1000?

[sameerrao]

Originally Posted by dutchmasterflex Damn.. twice the price for the VR. Isnt the 18-200mm with VR under $1000?

Yes .. I think it is a fantastic all-around lens for about $750 but may not be great for shooting racing cars or action as the lens is a little slower. Otherwise the range and VR may make it an awesome buy.

The VR works exceptionally well when you are taking shots of stationary objects. Basically the VR allows you to forgo the Monopod/tripod under most circumstances. It will also help smoothen the picture when panning to get the profile of a racing car. But it will not compensate for a fast lens (f/2.8 ) nor a fast auto-focus.

If you have the 18-55 or 18-70, the 18-200 is the perfect replacement but you may need a few more lenses depending on your circumstances.

Another possibility is the 80-400 VR that retails for about $1200 - the lens is not as good as the 70-200 but you get more range.

Take your camera and try it out.

So far I have the 12-24 f/4 for landscapes and wideangle shots of cars and the 70-200 f/2.8 for racetrack and regular zoom situations. When my wallet has a chance to recover, I might go in for a longer range lens or perhaps get a 1.4 converter instead. Let's see.