Which lense for my use? Lense pros please help

[Codie]

Ok, I already NEED a zoom lense for this D60 I bought. For those who know more about the lense gig than I do, Which one of these lenses would you reccomend for my use? (Mostly family photography (wife and son), sometimes large family pictures, but not very often, and wildlife within 50 yards or so). I have only searched Nikon lenses, so if there is another brand that is compatible with the D60 and will give me just as good of pictures for less money then please reccomend them for me.

AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED Autofocus Lens

OR

AF Zoom Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX VR Lens

THANKS in advance for your help

[Hillary]

I shot with the 70-300 for a while, no complaints if you have the light.

18-200 is a lot of stretch... but I have never shot with that lens

[Codie]

What about this Sigma lense?

Sigma
70-200mm f/2.8 II EX DG APO Macro HSM AF Lens for Nikon

[Shane]

What other lens do you have?

[TexasBob]

I have never used either Nikon lens, but the 18-200 is high on my wish list, just not lookint to spend the money now. If I remember correctly, you got a 50mm lens that doesn't autofocus on the D60. I would go with the 18-200 to cover all you shots with autofocus. Plus, I like that the 200 is hand holdable for most shots with the VR. If you are looking to save money, I have the 55-200 VR and have been pleased with it. Cheaper lens, but it takes better pictures than I can anyway.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/486717-USA/Nikon_2166_55_200mm_f_4_5_6G_ED_AF_S.html

[Codie]

What other lens do you have?

I have the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 AF, but it does not Auto Focus with the D60, so I have to manual focus it (which is not a big deal)

[Shane]

I have the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 AF, but it does not Auto Focus with the D60, so I have to manual focus it (which is not a big deal)

In that case, I'd get the 18-200mm. 50mm isn't wide enough for large family shots unless you back way off, so you could use the wider views from the short end. 200mm will get you zoomed in decently close on deer at 50 yards.

If you had another lens for wide angle already, I'd say go with the 70-200 f/2.8 Sigma. Low light capabilities would be better for deer pics. That 18-200 would be a good jack-of-all-trades though.

[Snakelover]

I have an 18-200mm for my Canon. If I'm in a situation where I only want to carry one light-weight lens to cover a wide range of possibilities, I use it. But if I know I'll only need a limited focal range or have the luxury of switching lenses, I'll usually choose one of my L-series lenses instead. Given a choice, I would rather have two lenses, a 24-70mm plus a 70-200mm, than to have only an 18-200mm to cover that 24-200mm range. I don't often have a need to go wider than 24mm. But I agree with Shane that you're definitely going to need something wider than 50mm. If it were me, I would probably get a good 24-70mm now and then save up for a good 70-200mm with IS.

[yaqui]

18-200. You can pretty much leave that lens on and never have to take it off. Great for Bdays and family pics. No need to worry about an IS unless you are shooting available light in the evenings, or early mornings. Or get a point and shoot for family stuff and grab a 70-200 2.8 for serious wildlife shots.

[Codie]

Ok, here is what I am down to, now is Sigma lacking the quality or is Nikon just priced so much higher because it says "NIKON" on it?

AF Zoom Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX VR Lens - $850.00

Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5 -6 auto focus/image stabablized lens - $530.00

Is the Nikon worth the extra money? Does it take clearer pictures? Does it lock and hold the zoom and focus better than the Sigma lenses? Just want to make sure I make the right decision the first time. Thanks in advance fot any information those who have used both brands of lenses before can give me

[Snakelover]

Nevermind. I was looking at a Sigma for Canon, not Nikon.

[Snakelover]

OK, here's the Nikon version for $399.82....

Sigma AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS (Optical Stabilizer) Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

You have to put it in your shopping cart to see the price, but you can always delete it without checking out (as I did)....

Because our price on this item is lower than the manufacturer's suggested retail price, the manufacturer does not allow us to show you our price until you place the item in your shopping cart. Retailers like Amazon have the legal right to set their own prices independently. Adding the item to your cart allows Amazon to show you our price consistent with our goal of always offering you the lowest possible prices on the widest selection of products.
Adding this item won't require you to purchase the product. You can easily remove it from your cart if you decide not to buy it.

[M38A1]

I have the Nikon 18-200VR on a D40x body. Been shooting it for about 18-20 months now and am pleased with the results, but not overjoyed. For the reasons mentioned above, 18 to 200 is a LOT of focal difference for one lens. Along with that comes some compromise in the quality from end to end.

However, for a 'vacation' lens, or 'one' lens on the camera without swapping I think the results are acceptable. I find myself using Photoshop's 'unsharpen mask' on a lot of shots simply to make up for some performance issues in that broad of a lens.

Go hit this link on a nice review of the 18-200VR.

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/250/cat/all

There's a couple things to note, first of which is 44 real-life reviews. Second is click on the little chart called "Blur Index". You'll see a chart popup that allows you to see where the lens becomes 'soft' at various f/stops and/or focal ranges. The review is spot on in that mine really likes f/8 throughout the mid-range. (Flat is good. Curved is beginning to get 'soft' at the edges as well as the higher up the chart)

Hope this helps with your decision....

.

[WyoBull]

I have had the 18-200 that I shot on my D200. Loved the lens for what it is, a great all around lens. When I went with a Full Frame body, D700, I sold it with my D200 to another member on TBH.
If I went on vacation, or just out for a day of shooting and did not want to carry a lot of gear, the 18-200 is what went with me.
It is interesting that this lens has actually increased in price since I bought and then sold mine.
It is only my opinion but I would stay with Nikon lenses if you shoot a Nikon body. I have owned others in the past and always wished I would have stayed with Nikon.

[Shane]

Ok, here is what I am down to, now is Sigma lacking the quality or is Nikon just priced so much higher because it says "NIKON" on it?

AF Zoom Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX VR Lens - $850.00

Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5 -6 auto focus/image stabablized lens - $530.00

Is the Nikon worth the extra money? Does it take clearer pictures? Does it lock and hold the zoom and focus better than the Sigma lenses? Just want to make sure I make the right decision the first time. Thanks in advance fot any information those who have used both brands of lenses before can give me

Sigma:
http://www.photographyreview.com/mfr...5_3128crx.aspx

Nikon:
http://www.photographyreview.com/cat...0_3128crx.aspx