I'm going to buy the nikon d5300...I have a question about the lens. Should I buy this lens or the Nikon 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6G ED AF-S DX VR Lens? I will be shooting people, landscapes and would like decent zoom for hockey games. This would be my primary...
873526
I really love my Nikon 55-300mm.. it takes really good pictures, I feel you would really like it to... hope this helps
2272240
It wouldn't be either better or worse. That would depend mainly on your apature settings. The 18-140mm allows a weirder zoom range. Your best bet is to find This for cheaper: Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX ED VR Nikkor Wide-Angle Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon DSLR Cameras
43413
Nikon's optics are incredibly 3-dimensional, with very bright and easy-to-see details. Just be sure the binocs you buy have a wide-enough field of vision to work while watching sports. You will love Nikon.
1919509
This is an awesome lense but it is not as wide as the Nikon 35mm f1.4 or the Nikon 50mm f1.4 which would give you more room in your picture. it is a good lens but more for portraits. The 70-200mm f2.8 is the best for sports and all around pictures, but a bit more money and worth every penny. I personally would not get the 85 for any sports even with how great the shots are your picture would crop in to small to catch a full play.
2052961
The 24-85 is an excellent lens that I use on my D700. However for a DX camera the 18-55mm VR is an excellent optical performer,lighter and costs less. It will also provide you with a wider angle than the 24-85. Keep in mind that the 24-85 on a DX will have the focal equivalent of 36-127mm.
33401
..for the money it is suppose to be an excellent lens. Read any and all reviews. My issue is with the noisey motor. Check out the lens at a nikon dealer for the final answer. Its a DX lens it will fit the d3000. Not sure exactly how much damping the VR provides, but its pretty good for a $250 55-200mm lens.
394030
agreed with the sentiments above. I have purchased the tamron 16-300, as well as the nikon 18-300 f6.3 and this lense. The difference with the nikon is noticeable. Not only in picture quality. But also in distance. the 300 on the tamron doesn't reach where the nikon does. granted the nikon 18-300 @300 doesn't match the nikon 55-300 @ 300 either. Also the movement, the tamron is much stiffer than the nikon options. A Great all day lense. Im working into prime lenses, and high quality fixed aperture lenses, but for now I still use this as my main glass.
558459
This lens is second to none. It has great contrast and clarity even at f/2.8. It has low distortion, focuses quickly, accepts filters, and works on full-frame cameras as well as "cropped sensor" DX ones. And if you hit someone with it, they'll probably go down. If you have a DX camera, you can save money by compromising on some of those features. Tokina's 16-50 f/2.8 DX lens is well-regarded and perhaps the closest to the Nikon 17-35. It's supposedly sharp and has good contrast both wide open and stopped down. It's solidly built. Landscape shooters like it. $600 Nikon's 12-24 f/4G DX lens is also very good. It might be too wide for you. $1000 Nikon's 16-85 f/3.5-5.6 DX is good, though not in the same class. $675 Note that I have experience only with the 17-35 (bought used). The rest is based on conversations with people who own those lenses.
941929
They make a Nikon version..a number of people have commented on low speed for sports. Most. Lens of this focal length have similar F-stop range
1958266
Yes d5300 is dx format should work great love this lens! Not sure about auto focus but not a big issue with fisheye
986585
Hi Firsuit,While the 14-24 is an excellent landscape lens for a camera with an FX sensor, your D5200 will add a 1.6 multiplier due to the DX sensor. Because of that, you will end up losing a lot of the wide angle ability.I would recommend the Nikon 10-24mm as an alternative. I use that lens on a D7000 and have taken some really good photos with it. Not to mention it is cheaper.If you ever get a camera with an FX sensor, then by all means, grab the 14-24mm or even the 16-35mm. Both good lenses (I use them both).Alan
2004342
I purchased the Nikon Brand VR 18-55mm DX f: 3.5-5.6 AF-S lens, used, last year for my Nikon D-90, and it is a happy combination. I am very pleased with the usefulness of the 18-55mm, expecially for the low price, I paid in the range of $125. It is actually on the camera at this moment. I am pleased that all of my "old" Nikon lens work with the D-90, although they, of course, lack vibration reduction. I have an Epson Stylus Photo 1400 printer capable of 13x19 prints and this lens is just fine in resolution for my use. OH!!! the lower priced Nikon d-40 does not operate in automatic mode with the older lens, so be watchful as your question implies, not all Nikons have the same capabilities. I purchased the Nikon Brand VR 18-55mm DX f: 3.5-5.6 AF-S lens, used, last year for my Nikon D-90, and it is a happy combination. I am very pleased with the usefulness of the 18-55mm, expecially for the low price, I paid in the range of $125. It is actually on the camera at this moment. I am pleased that all of my "old" Nikon lens work with the D-90, although they, of course, lack vibration reduction. I have an Epson Stylus Photo 1400 printer capable of 13x19 prints and this lens is just fine in resolution for my use. OH!!! the lower priced Nikon d-40 does not operate in automatic... » Read More I purchased the Nikon Brand VR 18-55mm DX f: 3.5-5.6 AF-S lens, used, last year for my Nikon D-90, and it is a happy combination. I am very pleased with the usefulness of the 18-55mm, expecially for the low price, I paid in the range of $125. It is actually on the camera at this moment. I am pleased that all of my "old" Nikon lens work with the D-90, although they, of course, lack vibration reduction. I have an Epson Stylus Photo 1400 printer capable of 13x19 prints and this lens is just fine in resolution for my use. OH!!! the lower priced Nikon d-40 does not operate in automatic mode with the older lens, so be watchful as your question implies, not all Nikons have the same capabilities. « Show Less
528653
Does that lack of image stabilization in the 20 mm lens factor in against choosing it over the 14-45 lens? I think I'm all set to get the 20 mm lens after doing my research and reading these comments, but that was one area I was still questioning.
1672482
Hi Eric,Thanks for your reply. I've already went ahead and bought the D3100 (got advice from some other people somewhere else on the internets ;)I received it yesterday and it does seem to be a very solid camera with lots of features that have me overwhelmed to say the least since I am a beginner in the world of photography.I do have one question: why is it that everyone recommends those lenses? How vastly different are they from the lens the comes with the camera? For example, what would a 35mm 1.8g do differently or better than the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens?~ Dan Hi Eric,Thanks for your reply. I've already went ahead and bought the D3100 (got advice from some other people somewhere else on the internets ;)I received it yesterday and it does seem to be a very solid camera with lots of features that have me overwhelmed to say the least since I am a beginner in the world of photography.I do have one question: why is it that everyone recommends those lenses? How vastly different are they from the lens the comes with the camera? For example, what would a 35mm 1.8g do differently or better than the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6... » Read More Hi Eric,Thanks for your reply. I've already went ahead and bought the D3100 (got advice from some other people somewhere else on the internets ;)I received it yesterday and it does seem to be a very solid camera with lots of features that have me overwhelmed to say the least since I am a beginner in the world of photography.I do have one question: why is it that everyone recommends those lenses? How vastly different are they from the lens the comes with the camera? For example, what would a 35mm 1.8g do differently or better than the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens?~ Dan « Show Less
227602
Just bought the D40x two weeks ago, and spent the weeks before that researching the D40x vs. the XTi.I'd go with the D40x... you can't go wrong with a Nikon, and the kit lens that comes with the XTi is terrible. I bought the D40x, and have since added a few accessories. I feel like I made the right decision and I am totally thrilled with the purchase... No regrets at all. Plus, Nikon makes a longer-lasting camera.D40x!!!
873522
I am shooting on a Nikon 3200. I went with the 55-300 for its flexibility. It gives great depth of fields and allows me take great pics no matter what. Being in an austere environment this lens works great for long range and close range photograph. The longer 400mm lens has some problems and the 300mm gives better f-stop in my opinion. I found for cost and range of meters to be perfect. Clear shots, great DOF and quickness is great. I shot 90% free hand and have no vibration problems/blurry in my photos thanks to the VR.
423677
If you are going to stick with a DX sensor Nikon for a while, then I think the 18-300mm is your best value. The image quality is going to be very comparable to the 28-300mm, plus the 18-300 has these advantages for the DX shooter: - It starts at 18mm, so you have much wider coverage for landscape shots or tight spaces - It's smaller and lighter. Since this is going to be an all-purpose travel lens, this will be very helpful - It's about $150 less - If you ever go up to FX / full-frame, you can always sell this lens down the road and recoup about 65-75% of the original cost Enjoy!