Which lens for a Nikon D7200?

KryptoNeo

KryptoNeo

Suspended / Banned
Messages
605
Name
Stephen
Edit My Images
Yes
Next week I will be purchasing a new Nikon D7200 and then at the end of the month I am going to the EGX event at the NEC in Birmingham.
I have never been to the NEC before so I have no idea what the lighting situation will be once there.

So I would just like some advice from someone who might own a D7200 as to how it copes in low light and would the kit 18-140mm lens be suitable to use in the NEC or my only other option financially is to buy the D7200 body only and get a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 vc with it and lose out on a bit of focal length.

Basically I want to get some decent low light shots but would like to have a zoom lens rather than a prime.

So any advice is welcome

Thanks.
 
I would go for the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8, not sure if the D7200 fixed the strange probelm of not being able to focus in Live View with the Tamron, but i know the 17-50mm Tammy won't autofocus in LV on the D7000 and D7100

I have a D7100 and very impressed with the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8

No idea about the NEC though for lighting, or what an EGX event is :thinking:
 
I honestly didn't realise sigma did this lens. I have just been looking through some of their range of lenses for Nikon and I just noticed the 24-105mm f4.

I may just be able to stretch my budget to one of these if it would be a suitable lens. While I would like the f2.8 aperture of the 17-50mm the added focal length of the 24-105mm f4 is also appealing.
 
But don't forget that 24mm on the 24-105, will only give you an effective field of view of a 36mm lens on a Nikon DX camera like the D7200, whereas a DX lens starting at 17mm give you an effective field of view of 25.5mm. So you will have to decide if going for the longer tele option and sacrificing the proper wide angle is important to you.
 
If you can analyse you past shots you will see what is your most popular focal length

Nikon always offer a "kit" zoom which is good value and usually is ...... but if that is not in your used range .... primes are good

You can really never go wrong with the inexpensive 50mm f1.8 ..... even though it translates to 75mm f1.8 DX ..... you will be surprise what a useful lens it is, especially when you see the images on your screen or printed . if is mall and light with a very good IQ ...... and if you ever upgrade to FX ..... the 50mm Nikons are not restricted to DX ..... they are v good in low light, although IMHO Nikon DX sensors, even the one in the D7200 does suffer from noise over ISO 800/ISO 1000 depending on the conditions, especially in the "blacks" if you under-expose

The 50mm will be good for the NEC and will encourage you to "get nearer" and frame your shot allowing you to think more about your composition

Costs very little new and "peanuts" used
 
Last edited:
Dont mess around with the Tammy / Sigma F2.8, just spend a bit more and get the Nikon 17-55. Its a fabulous lens, much better IQ - only downside is the weight over the other two...
 
darkeeboy said:
Dont mess around with the Tammy / Sigma F2.8, just spend a bit more and get the Nikon 17-55. Its a fabulous lens, much better IQ - only downside is the weight over the other two...
Click to expand...

It is over 3 times the price of an equivalent Tamron or Sigma though (£980 vs £270 for the Sigma according to Amazon), i'd still pick the Sigma over the Nikon for this reason alone
 
Last edited:
darkeeboy said:
Dont mess around with the Tammy / Sigma F2.8, just spend a bit more and get the Nikon 17-55. Its a fabulous lens, much better IQ - only downside is the weight over the other two...
Click to expand...
Another downside could be the price?

Back when I had Canon DSLR's I went for the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 and just as with Nikon it was cheaper, smaller and lighter than the camers manufacturers own lens and lets be honest, away from the test bench and other than when pixel peeping how often can you honestly tell what lens took what real world shot after processing?

When I was a Nikon shoter I had a variable aperture zoom but I can see the advantages of the f2.8's and if going for one these days I'd go for the Sigma or Tamron for most of the image quality but with the savings in bulk and weight.
 
darkeeboy said:
Dont mess around with the Tammy / Sigma F2.8, just spend a bit more and get the Nikon 17-55. Its a fabulous lens, much better IQ - only downside is the weight over the other two...
Click to expand...

As much as I'd prefer to buy the Nikon version of the lens, it is way out of my budget.
 
BillN_33 said:
If you can analyse you past shots you will see what is your most popular focal length

Nikon always offer a "kit" zoom which is good value and usually is ...... but if that is not in your used range .... primes are good

You can really never go wrong with the inexpensive 50mm f1.8 ..... even though it translates to 75mm f1.8 DX ..... you will be surprise what a useful lens it is, especially when you see the images on your screen or printed . if is mall and light with a very good IQ ...... and if you ever upgrade to FX ..... the 50mm Nikons are not restricted to DX ..... they are v good in low light, although IMHO Nikon DX sensors, even the one in the D7200 does suffer from noise over ISO 800/ISO 1000 depending on the conditions, especially in the "blacks" if you under-expose

The 50mm will be good for the NEC and will encourage you to "get nearer" and frame your shot allowing you to think more about your composition

Costs very little new and "peanuts" used
Click to expand...


My only worry with primes like the 50mm is there is no image stabilisation in the lens. I am pretty steady but I'm asthmatic and every now and again the inhalers I take give me slight tremors in my hands. Would the 50mm be quick enough to use hand held indoors?
 
In my experience the 50 1.8's are great indoors with decent light i.e. on sunny days. You can keep the ISO low and still get a fast shutter speed. They are also great in low light, albeit you'll likely have to increase the ISO which will introduce noise as mentioned above or use a flashgun (or both). I tend to find on dull days/evenings I struggle even when cranking the ISO up to 800+ especially with moving subjects (largely toddler and puppy) which is when the SB700 comes out...
 
I always think these days there's a little too much emphasis put on IS or VR (or whatever the manufacturer calls it). Sure it helps in low light or If you have unsteady hands or using a powerful telephone lens on a static subject, but back in the day when I was shooting film (for over 25 years when I was 11 onwards), I never had any sort of image stabiliser, nor did the pros, except for the good old fashioned tripod or table top.

Like I say, it's a nice to have, and quite amazing what it will do on modern cameras, but for a standard zoom (in the 24-70 bracket), I don't think I've ever needed VR for any shots I've taken. Don't forget VW adds weight, costs and complexity.

I certainly wouldn't be put off by the 17-55 F2.8 DX or the 50mm F1.8 not having image stabilisation, as in my humble opinion it's not needed, and in the case of the former lens, I got some absolutely cracking images with that puppy (and regretted selling it).
 
Not sure what the light is like in the NEC but the 18-140 kit lens is pretty decent and offers a really good FL range. Ok, there are better lenses out there but for the cash, when purchased as a kit, it is well worth having. As with most (all ?) Nikon lenses the AF is pretty snappy in the right conditions.
 
Right I've gone ahead and purchased the Nikon 50mm f1.8G. But I had a bit of a twitchy finger and accidentally ordered a yongnuo 568EX flash and a Meike battery Grip as well as a sling strap.....Ooopsie. I'm going to order the D7200 along with the 18-140 kit lens at some point in the week.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top