But, with the AFS lenses you just flip the switch on the lens?
Nikon D3100 with 18-55mm VR Lens
- Thread starter Gigabyte
- Start date
But, with the AFS lenses you just flip the switch on the lens?
AndyWest
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 8,400
- Name
- Andy
- Edit My Images
- No
OK - to be clear here
I posted the link to a lens which was being discussed here
the Seller lives in LONDON - I live in Scotland
sorry for the confusion - in future I'll refrain
however Andy you got a good price for a good lens - so enjoy .....
I will mate and thanks for the tip off. If you are ever in Caterham I'll buy you that pint!
AndyWest
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 8,400
- Name
- Andy
- Edit My Images
- No
Yeah AF-S lenses are fine, I'm talking about completely manual lenses with aperture rings and no internal computing. I have a Carl Zeiss 50mm f1.4 lens which is built just like old lenses from years ago. The lens can't talk to the Camera body like an AF-S one can.
Thought so. Thanks
ElegantSpoon
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 214
- Edit My Images
- No
Good win you will love it! I thought yardbent was selling it too. No harm done though you got it for a decent price.
AndyWest
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 8,400
- Name
- Andy
- Edit My Images
- No
I think it is suposed to be a bit better but then it depends if you need the extra reach. I had a Canon 24-105L when I had Canon cameras and it was a great focal length but I rarely used the long end [ooh er Mrs!
]I think the best all rounder is probably the 18-200mm. I have seen many great images from that lens but it's £550 new so my £82 18-70 is a real bargain plus from what i have seen it is tak sharp!
ShoeQueen
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,370
- Name
- Lynn
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't want to spend too much on my first lens as its my first DSLR, but I would like more reach than the 18-55 kit lens.I think it is suposed to be a bit better but then it depends if you need the extra reach. I had a Canon 24-105L when I had Canon cameras and it was a great focal length but I rarely used the long end [ooh er Mrs!
I think the best all rounder is probably the 18-200mm. I have seen many great images from that lens but it's £550 new so my £82 18-70 is a real bargain plus from what i have seen it is tak sharp!
Enjoy your new lens, that's a good price.
I probably need to decide which body I want first though!
Last edited:
AndyWest
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 8,400
- Name
- Andy
- Edit My Images
- No
I think it is suposed to be a bit better but then it depends if you need the extra reach. I had a Canon 24-105L when I had Canon cameras and it was a great focal length but I rarely used the long end [ooh er Mrs!
I think the best all rounder is probably the 18-200mm. I have seen many great images from that lens but it's £550 new so my £82 18-70 is a real bargain plus from what i have seen it is tak sharp!
I have no experience of the 18-105mm but believe it to be good by 'kit lens' standards. However, the 18-70mm is reputed to be as near as dam-it pro standards on IQ, punching above its weight at its level in the market, as I say, thats the story and I have no reason to doubt it . . .
The 18-105mm is kit lens build quality, plastic bayonet compared with a metal bayonet fixing for instance, on the 18-70, last a long time . . .
When I made the decision to go minimalist and take on the D5000 rather than keep the D90 that I had purchased 3 months before!!! I looked at my photo files, the vast majority were in the FL of 18-70mm . . . around 35-50mm was very common.
One of the lenses I dumped was the Nikon 18-200VR mkI . . . great walkabout lens, you think . . . all that zoom, but as I say looking at picture Exifs, they regularly told a different story. Its sharp and fast focusing, but not as good as the 18-70 IMHO. It weighs 20ozs (600+grs)!!!! thats heeeeavvvvy, it does have sweet spots and 'shines', as do all zoom lenses, but, the more zoom the more the 'not so sweet spots' are noticed.
Pound for pound, less than £100 it seems, the 18-70mm is a steal . . . however, you pays your money and takes your choice. Most people are swayed by the longest zoom they can get and to hell with the picture quality, after all, its a Nikon??? . . . thats for a little while. Then reality starts to set in, can't extract that last notch of sharpness that you know can be had, colours are a bit muted and god, its heavy around the neck after walking a few miles . . . etc., etc.
All the points I make are personal and some are, may be, marginal, even of little significance to some individuals? . . . So choose carefully and wisely folks, with an open mind and both eyes open . . .
Remember, its not the camera, but the lens, and ultimately, he or she who is behind pressing the shutter that makes the picture.
CJS
PS;
So that no one is under any illusions, this is the original of the 'Hover Fly' picture posted earlier. PS is/was? needed, not much, but some. This was a JPG picture from camera. These days I would use RAW, I would expect the PS'ing to be a little better, with program RAW's greater finesse? I have added a tad of simple sharpening, a modern digital requirement and of course, the full pixel count has had to be reduced to 800 on the long edge, other wise, nothing more.
Last edited:
Right guys, ive been pointed in this direction as i have a similar thread running. A quick outline. I have £400 ish to spend and half of that is defo going on the Samyang 8mm f3.5 Fisheye.
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI....31048&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT#ht_3381wt_1137
Dont try and talk me out of it coz ive done this myself to and fro for a few weeks lol. So that leaves £200. At present i have the 18-55 kit lens which came with the camera about 2 mnths ago and a 55-200 AF-S Nikon VR lens that ive bought new at the end of Aug off an Ebay shop for £115. Ive used it once so far so selling it isnt an option. Now when i started thinking about how i could spend the £200 the 1st thing that popped into my mind was that nice looking 18-105 kit lens i seen sitting on the D90 in a Dixons branch at Newcastle Airport while waiting for a flight. I thought i could get it for around £180 then use it for a main lens that would do for most stuff. Then i noticed the size of the end, 67 mm i think which is way bigger than the other 2 (52mm) i have just bought numerous filters for. So now i find myself in this thread after being told about the 18-70mm VR. Why is this lens so much better than the kit lens at such an affordable price? Am i just buying for buyings sake here? What is the filter size on the 18-70? I have to say im impressed by the photo taken with it! My problem is once ive got the money i start to question myself and wonder if i even need any of these lenses. Like i say the Fisheye is a defo as its so intriguing to me.
Help!
Quote from Ken Rockwells review...
Buy one if you want, I did in 2004!
Today (2008) I'd suggest saving for the 18-200mm VR instead, or using the 18-55mm DX I usually use because it's so small.
For the same price as this 18-70mm you can get the 18-55 and and the excellent 55-200mm VR. That's what I'd do with $350.
Your choice should be based on how you like how they feel and focus. Image quality is very similar.
Heres the whole review.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1870.htm
He does state that its a 'proper serious lens' not a cheapy and the clue is given in the aperture range.
I see from the review that the filter size is also 67mm like the 18-105mm...hmm. That means i'd have to buy another full set of filters (3 nd and polariser, Uv and Screw on macro type lenses).
Phil
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI....31048&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT#ht_3381wt_1137
Dont try and talk me out of it coz ive done this myself to and fro for a few weeks lol. So that leaves £200. At present i have the 18-55 kit lens which came with the camera about 2 mnths ago and a 55-200 AF-S Nikon VR lens that ive bought new at the end of Aug off an Ebay shop for £115. Ive used it once so far so selling it isnt an option. Now when i started thinking about how i could spend the £200 the 1st thing that popped into my mind was that nice looking 18-105 kit lens i seen sitting on the D90 in a Dixons branch at Newcastle Airport while waiting for a flight. I thought i could get it for around £180 then use it for a main lens that would do for most stuff. Then i noticed the size of the end, 67 mm i think which is way bigger than the other 2 (52mm) i have just bought numerous filters for. So now i find myself in this thread after being told about the 18-70mm VR. Why is this lens so much better than the kit lens at such an affordable price? Am i just buying for buyings sake here? What is the filter size on the 18-70? I have to say im impressed by the photo taken with it! My problem is once ive got the money i start to question myself and wonder if i even need any of these lenses. Like i say the Fisheye is a defo as its so intriguing to me.
Help!
Quote from Ken Rockwells review...
Buy one if you want, I did in 2004!
Today (2008) I'd suggest saving for the 18-200mm VR instead, or using the 18-55mm DX I usually use because it's so small.
For the same price as this 18-70mm you can get the 18-55 and and the excellent 55-200mm VR. That's what I'd do with $350.
Your choice should be based on how you like how they feel and focus. Image quality is very similar.
Heres the whole review.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1870.htm
He does state that its a 'proper serious lens' not a cheapy and the clue is given in the aperture range.
I see from the review that the filter size is also 67mm like the 18-105mm...hmm. That means i'd have to buy another full set of filters (3 nd and polariser, Uv and Screw on macro type lenses).
Phil
Last edited:
Phew Phil, thats an entry . . .
First, the 18-70 is not a VR lens, you dont need VR at this sort of FL unless you are into low light, then you need fast glass . . . and the 5000 has excelent hi ISO any way. The 18-70 has a 67mm filter thread, thats how they are, dont think Nikon will change it for you 
Sample pic, I was testing the '3200 ISO' of the D5000 and 18-70mm lens:
I would suggest reading this thread carefully, especially the last few and my post #50. These should, I think, cover your questions?
Look at that,I did not try to dissuade you from the Samyang . . .
. . . Then if I can help, I will, but I'm not into any form of debate, I (have) state facts as I see them and in my experience.
CJS
Last edited:
Honest CJS, im not debating anything. I am new to photography and am learning all of the time. The 'dont talk me out of remark' was general as quite a few have said 'do you really want one'.Phew Phil, thats an entry . . .
Sample pic, I was testing the '3200 ISO' of the D5000 and 18-70mm lens:
I would suggest reading this thread carefully, especially the last few and my post #50. These should, I think, cover your questions?
Look at that,I did not try to dissuade you from the Samyang . . .
Then if I can help, I will, but I'm not into any form of debate, I (have) state facts as I see them and in my experience.
CJS
I just need to be sure that if i go for the 18-70 that its notably better (i think youve proved that) than the 18-55 kit lens and a better choice than the 18-105mm kit lens. You have to bare in mind theres so many lenses being recommended to me at this time so i want to buy the right one. My filters were only cheap from Ebay so i suppose i can live with that and take it as an upgrade as i have already had to do with a bigger lowepro bag. I have so much to learn and fully appreciate people like yourself taking the time to help and advise others like me. I would love to spend more money but my level and knowledge maybe dont at present.
Thanks again, Phil
ElegantSpoon
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 214
- Edit My Images
- No
I personally can't see the point of getting either 18-70 or 18-105 when you have 18-200mm covered and a selection of filters for them that won't fit either new lens.
You are right 'ES', if you are happy with the IQ compromises that inevitably creep into 'Super Zooms' . . . been there, don that, got the T-shirt, I was happy. Then I started getting problems with my health and struggled with the weight, a D90/18-200 weighs in at one and a half bags of sugar around the neck.
I started to look at the alternatives, D5000, still a D90 under the skin, 4ozs lighter, swivel screen, (my right knee has given out) the 18-200 is a 'lump'. I dug out the long forgotten 18-70, still weighty at 16ozs, but every little helps.
So, my original motivation to look at the options available, had nothing to do with IQ, I had a similar view; 'why . . . when you can . . . '? As time has passed one has come to appreciate the finesse of the 18-70, 'the edge' that it has, its universal function, to explore the boundaries, which the 18-70 undoubtedly has. Lots of folk advocate and are happy with primes, especialy 50 and 20mm, giving up zoom altogether for that 'little bit of extra edge'
So in my book, its the all things to all togs, general purpose, 'average' against 'the edge' . . . pays your money and takes your choice . . . but remember, 'the edge' always gives little bit of extra satisfaction . . .
CJS
Last edited:
Honest CJS, im not debating anything. I am new to photography and am learning all of the time. The 'dont talk me out of remark' was general as quite a few have said 'do you really want one'.
I just need to be sure that if i go for the 18-70 that its notably better (i think youve proved that) than the 18-55 kit lens and a better choice than the 18-105mm kit lens. You have to bare in mind theres so many lenses being recommended to me at this time so i want to buy the right one. My filters were only cheap from Ebay so i suppose i can live with that and take it as an upgrade as i have already had to do with a bigger lowepro bag. I have so much to learn and fully appreciate people like yourself taking the time to help and advise others like me. I would love to spend more money but my level and knowledge maybe dont at present.
Thanks again, Phil
I think the 18-70 is a better all purpose lens, but with its obvious limitations at the price point, however, it does punch well above its weight. A tog has to decide if they need the extra length, be it 105mm or indeed 200mm, but in my book weight/practicality and IQ need to be considered, understanding, 105 or the 200 lenses are not bad, indeed, they are very good! But one comes back to 'the edge' . . . call it smug satisfaction? . . .
I have found the trick is to keep within the confines of the lens you choose, but trust the extra that you can get from it, if it has it? . . . For instance, I find the quality allows me to crop tighter, if needs be, but as I rarely print out, this is never challenged as a print on the wall. Then again, if I did, smaller print with a large mount card, titled, in a decent frame . . . loads of impact, I suspect, the hover fly would work in this situation?
So, decide what you want, and go for it, remember, the camera has little to do with the final image, its the 'eye' through a decent lens that wins the day.
CJS
To be fair this is the price point im at atm and my skills will never out weigh the lenses ability thats for sure. Maybe i should stick with what i have atleast for the next few months and get some use out of the lenses i have and see where im at then. That said there are a few 18-70s on Ebay going cheap but i just worry about buying off there. I have bought a few bits but theyve been off ebay shops and have been new, not used. I dont get why people dont have a reserve as theres an 18-70 on there now with hoya filters and the bid is £1.20 or something. Why do people do this? BTW, ive ordered the FisheyeI think the 18-70 is a better all purpose lens, but with its obvious limitations at the price point, however, it does punch well above its weight. A tog has to decide if they need the extra length, be it 105mm or indeed 200mm, but in my book weight/practicality and IQ need to be considered, understanding, 105 or the 200 lenses are not bad, indeed, they are very good! But one comes back to 'the edge' . . . call it smug satisfaction? . . .
I have found the trick is to keep within the confines of the lens you choose, but trust the extra that you can get from it, if it has it? . . . For instance, I find the quality allows me to crop tighter, if needs be, but as I rarely print out, this is never challenged as a print on the wall. Then again, if I did, smaller print with a large mount card, titled, in a decent frame . . . loads of impact, I suspect, the hover fly would work in this situation?
So, decide what you want, and go for it, remember, the camera has little to do with the final image, its the 'eye' through a decent lens that wins the day.
CJS
Phil
ElegantSpoon
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 214
- Edit My Images
- No
I doubt it will sell for that. The auction format means things start low and then go mad in the last seconds.
I fully understand that as ive sold a few things myself but why not put a reserve or have a shorter selling period? I suppose im just impatient lol
Phil
Last edited:
ElegantSpoon
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 214
- Edit My Images
- No
A reserve can put people off because it can be a wasted bid. I agree about people making their auctions too long 3 days Fri-Sundays gotta be the sweet spot.
I remeber the 1st and only time ive sold something. I put 7 days and wondered every day why not one person had bidded, then all of a sudden in the last hour it went nuts! haha I bet theres some great deals out there but im very apprehensive about buying lenses especially off ebay. I would buy used from a shop or someone i could meet up with to try it out. Maybe im missing out.....
ElegantSpoon
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 214
- Edit My Images
- No
It is difficult indeed but there are some great bargains to be had. I think you can tell a lot from the description & their feedback.
Well Phil, I think making the best of what you have is a good idea, its early days in your togging experience. Try out what you have seen, see how you get on, learn from mistakes, enjoy the surceases, you will also learn what you want, like and dislike. 18-70's will still be available . . . if you still wanted one next summer?
CJS
ShoeQueen
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,370
- Name
- Lynn
- Edit My Images
- No
Hmmm.... I'm now deliberating between D90 with 18-105 VR kit lens or getting a D5000 body and 18-70 AFS... the second combination would be cheaper and lighter...
I'm a complete beginner, but want to learn and am currently using a borrowed D90 and find it quite intuitive, and I do tend to use the top LCD - is the menu system on D5000 easy enough to use for quickly changing settings?
I'm a complete beginner, but want to learn and am currently using a borrowed D90 and find it quite intuitive, and I do tend to use the top LCD - is the menu system on D5000 easy enough to use for quickly changing settings?
Her you go 'ShoeQueen':
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond5000/
Pages 7 through 13 give you the controls and screen menus, its worth scanning the before pages too, and conclusion page, have a squint at sample gallery as well.
The set up menu is almost identical to the D90. The exterior controls are a mix of buttons and easily accessible 'direct menu' hand holding, some say
and some :thumbsdown:, I like it that way, but then I was happy with a D40X, D70, D80 and the D90, adaptability? I'm dyslexic and forget easily, so the reminders are good for me, thats my 'grey haired' excuse . . . There is the issue of 'no body motor' . . . so lens choice is towards modern AFS type lenses, not as restrictive as some would have you believe . . . but depends on the rout you intend to take, one or two significant lenses, or a whole shed load, most of which will never be used more than a couple of times, when the novelty wears off
And the swivel screen can be a great help for difficult angles, or if you cant or dont want to 'get down and dirty'?
CJS
Yardbent
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,761
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
"ShoeQueen"
I handled a D90 + 18-105 lens in Jessops
with smaller hands [and Dupuytren's contracture] I found it quite large/heavy at full zoom
prob mentioned here before - an 18-105 *may* not have 100% IQ over the full range
D5000 + 18-70 would be a good starter - then add a zoom if/when you feel the need too
I recently got a 55-200 VR here reasonable £££ as I found I never used/needed a 300mm
I handled a D90 + 18-105 lens in Jessops
with smaller hands [and Dupuytren's contracture] I found it quite large/heavy at full zoom
prob mentioned here before - an 18-105 *may* not have 100% IQ over the full range
D5000 + 18-70 would be a good starter - then add a zoom if/when you feel the need too
I recently got a 55-200 VR here reasonable £££ as I found I never used/needed a 300mm
ShoeQueen
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,370
- Name
- Lynn
- Edit My Images
- No
Thanks - someone at camera club has one too so if she has it along this week I'll have another look.The set up menu is almost identical to the D90. The exterior controls are a mix of buttons and easily accessible 'direct menu' hand holding, some say
There is the issue of 'no body motor' . . . so lens choice is towards modern AFS type lenses, not as restrictive as some would have you believe . . . but depends on the rout you intend to take, one or two significant lenses, or a whole shed load, most of which will never be used more than a couple of times, when the novelty wears off
I'm using a D90 with that lens and I don't notice it too big or heavy when using, but its heavy when carrying it around.
I did think of getting a Canon for that reason, but then if I want to move up through Canon models I think they are just as heavy as the Nikons.
Thanks folks for the help and advice - I know both are good choices, so I just need to work out which is best for me.
You've got me looking at 18-70mm lenses on ebay now! Apart from the mount being metal and not plastic what makes this better than my kit lens? Would I really see a difference in IQ if I got one? I've also been thinking of selling my 55-200mm lens and getting a 70-300mm one instead as I need abit more zoom for my trips to the zoo.
Ha ha, im currently watching 4 of them but i dont know if i can be bothered with all that bidding malarchy. Getting your hopes up only to lose in the last second! Someone offered 1 guy who has the lens with 2 hoya filters £100 and hes not biting as he says theres plenty of interest from others...... The lens is £150 at Jessops. Hmmm
ElegantSpoon
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 214
- Edit My Images
- No
Your best bet with ebay is to just bid say £80 and leave them. Thats what I did and they would finish at £82, £83 etc and then after about four or five days of that one ended for £75 Perfect.
Perfect.
ElegantSpoon
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 214
- Edit My Images
- No
Keep us posted
Nikon seem to be putting VR on every thing these days . . . do you need VR on such a short lens?
They make them out of plastic now.
18-55mm and 18-105mm are slower @ f3.5 to f5.6 . . . the 18-70 is f3.5 to f4.5.
Technically, the boffins among us will have to look at the graphs?
All I know is, from what I can see, all these 'kit lenses' are far better that we give them credit for, see this thread:
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=262802
Which says, often its the 'photographers eye' . . . dont blame the tools . . .
CJS
Well mate i thought about it....then the money burnt a hole in my pocket and im now awaiting this 18-70....
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI....740091&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT#ht_500wt_1156
If its as described (im worried as its my 1st auction) then its a great buy baring in mind the included Jessops UV filter. One went for £132 a few hours before! I cant wait till it arrives!
Phil
Cliff.Barnes
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 204
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'm just away to buy one of these for my girlfriend's birthday.
Warehouse Express are selling:
Nikon D3100 Digital SLR with 18-55mm VR Lens for £498
and the Nikon D3100 Body only for £428
Do you think It'll be worth getting the 18-55mm lens for £70?
It sounds like a bargain to me.
Warehouse Express are selling:
Nikon D3100 Digital SLR with 18-55mm VR Lens for £498
and the Nikon D3100 Body only for £428
Do you think It'll be worth getting the 18-55mm lens for £70?
It sounds like a bargain to me.