new walk around lens help?

Dubn83

Dubn83

Suspended / Banned
Messages
491
Name
David
Edit My Images
No
hey guys, im lookin for an upgrade for my d3100 kit lens. ive got a 50mm 1.4 witch kind of lives on the body but can be a bit restrictive when out with my 3 boys (they never stand still as u can imagine). and I have a sigma 10-20mm for landscape witch im getting into plus my dads 70-300vr that has been "borrowed" sicne xmas :lol:
now ive got a bit lost with what to get, want sum thing that can handle the darker stuff to shoot a lot at dusk or lata as I go out when boys are asleep.
thinkin sigma 24-70??
 
if you like 18-55 range as kit lens check tamron 17-50mm f2.8 non VC as it's nice lens for the money.

24-70 is fine too, just isn't that wide,but has more reach... decision is yours :)


welcome to TP
 
Another vote for the Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8.

Pro build and my favourite DX lens.
I also have the 12-24mm f4.0

Riz :)
 
i suggested something in similar price to sigma as OP is thinking of getting one.

if money no issue nikon 17-55 is best choice


what budget you have in mind?
 
Last edited:
Never got round to trying the Nikon version but the Tamron 17-50 produces excellent sharp images with great contrast.
 
The Tamron 17-50 is the one to get then. The non-VC version is meant to be a little sharper but I'd go for the VC version which is sharp enough and I think getting more shots is better than getting slightly sharper shots.
 
Dubn83 said:
Cool, is there any other sigma choices? I'm really happy with the quality and work I get from my 10-20.
Click to expand...

Not the last time I looked.

Sadly, with lenses, as with most things in life, you get what you pay for...
 
I've got a siggy 28/70 2.8 sat in a cupboard doing nothing since purchasing the nikon version.
 
Dubn83 said:
I just looke at them and are a bit thin on the ground & will it AF on my d3100?

And just spores they do a sigma 17-70 2.8-4f?
Click to expand...

Depends on the version, if it has HSM after it's name then it will.

The 17-70 is a decent enough lens although I'd probably save some money and get the Nikon 18-70 instead.
 
Dubn83 said:
Think ill keep with the fast lens and look at the tamron 17-50 2.8 & sigma 24-70 2.8?
Click to expand...

The 24-70mm focal range was designed for full frame 35mm cameras

17-50mm is designed to replicate that field of view on your camera, it is designed for your camera, forget the 24-70.
 
Had the Nikon 18-55 & 18-70 previously on my D3100, but love that i've settled on the Tamron 17-50 non-VC. Cracking value at around £200 2nd hand.
 
I have the Sigma 24-70 and love it a great walk about lens and looks great on the camera, only slight drawback is the filter, size 82mm when using filters
 
Theres the Sigma 17-70 f2.8, Can be had for £349 from Clifton... It's what im looking to get, although I shoot Canon
 
Dubn83 said:
New question, will the tamron work on a FF body if I upgrade (sum time)?
Click to expand...
It's a DX specific lens. It will work in crop mode. If buying used you will get back nearly what you paid for it though.

In my opinion you should buy lenses for your current needs rather than compromise in case you go FF ... if there is a lens that covers both then get the ff lens, but there are no (practical) standard zooms that are FF & DX
 
Dubn83 said:
Cheers mate, thought that would be the case. I know my Nikon 50mm 1.4 will work on a FF.

Now need to work out weather to go tamron 17-50 2.8 or the sigma 17-70 2.8-4?
Click to expand...
Haven't used the sigma 17-70 but I know a few people who have it and they seem to like it. I have used the tamron 17-50 (non VC) and I thought it was excellent - honestly think it is a win/win tbh, if it was me I'd go with the tamron only because I've used one before and I liked it.
 
sorry , about the miss understanding , the 18-105 is f4 to f5.6 , so in most daytime situations it will be as good as the 2.8 , obviosly in low light the 2.8 would be better
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top