Lens dilemma! (assistance required)

martinturner · 14 Nov 2007 at 12:38

Have got bugger all money (child on the way!) and want to upgrade from the 18-55 kit lens which came with my D40.

Really want something to be able to give me a better zoom/macro.

Basically, I have seen a Sigma 55-300 lens (telephoto and Macro), although no AF-S so is this really a pain?!? I think mainly I would be using it for Macro work tbh. There is also a Tamron one, both of which I have seen for under £100.

Alternatively, I have seen a 55-200 Nikkor lens VR AF-S for ~£140 (not retail, but auction site).

Having bugger all money, what would be most fun on such a tight budget, or would you recommend something else. Financially, I am not going to have the several hundred pounds to play with for lens for quite some time so was wondering what others have done with really tight budgets. Had to really rally around to get the D40 in the first place.

Thanks (as always)

TrUz · 14 Nov 2007 at 12:43

Another option would be to get some filters to have fun with...

TrUz

Irish_Tom · 14 Nov 2007 at 12:47

I've not heard of a 55-300mm lens from Sigma. AFAIK they only do a 55-200mm or a 70-300mm. Correct me if I'm wrong.

The 70-300mm Macro is a good budget telephoto with macro capabilities. However, the lack of AF is going to be a pain for normal telephoto use. Generally when taking Macro you would want to manually focus anyway so that's not as much of a problem.

The Nikon 55-200mm AF-S is going to be ok at extending your range up to 200mm for telephoto work but it's not going to be ideal for macro.

I'm not really sure what the answer is as far as alternatives. Maybe someone else will but I thought I would outline the problems you are going to have with both of those choices.

Panzer

martinturner · 14 Nov 2007 at 12:51

Sorry, my bad, I meant 70-300.

Is manual focus a real pain for zoom shots? What is the main problem with manually focussing? Shakey shots? or a case of knowing what is in focus and whats not? Not got a lens to fully understand limitations.

Filters, I already have

Thank you!

TrUz · 14 Nov 2007 at 12:53

Flick your kit lens to M and see how you get on with it. If you find it ok then go for the none AF-S lens.

TrUz

robmiller · 14 Nov 2007 at 12:59

martinturner said:
Is manual focus a real pain for zoom shots? What is the main problem with manually focussing? Shakey shots? or a case of knowing what is in focus and whats not? Not got a lens to fully understand limitations.

Yes. Walk around for an entire day with your current lens set to MF and see how you enjoy it—you probably won't

wez130 · 14 Nov 2007 at 14:22

if you are going to use it primarily for macro, then manual focus is ideal anyway, auto focus is a PITA with macro stuff.

martinturner · 14 Nov 2007 at 15:05

Yeah, ideally is going to be for Macro stuff. I think the manual mode is perfect so I can control DOF.

Telezoom ... just a case of how awkward it would be to use. Would I have to use a tripod in every instance? or am I missing the point?

Thanks for all the help

Aod · 14 Nov 2007 at 17:28

martinturner said:
Yeah, ideally is going to be for Macro stuff. I think the manual mode is perfect so I can control DOF.

Telezoom ... just a case of how awkward it would be to use. Would I have to use a tripod in every instance? or am I missing the point?

Thanks for all the help

modern cameras don't have focusing screens in the viewfinder, so you can't see whether you're 100% focussed or not. this combined with the teeny-weeny viewfinder in Budget DSLRs and you'll have a hard time judging whether somethings focussed at all!