Could somebody please explain me why can&acute;t I achieve same results with cheaper lens? First the question: this is a 3.5 maximum aperture lens, why can&acute;t I achieve the same results with my 18 - 105 kit lens with the same maximum aperture?
1941236
Because a 10mm focal length lens is different from an 18mm focal length lens. Aperture, while important, is simply how much light the lens can let in (it affects depth of field as well); it has nothing to do with the angle and field of view of the lens. This lens and your lens should look very similar when they are both zoomed to the same focal lengths (18-24mm, the only focal lengths where they overlap). If you buy this lens and only use it from 18-24mm you are wasting your money. The reason people buy this lens for its extremely wide focal lengths (10-14mm). They give a perspective that cannot be gained in any other way, especially on DX. Few lenses get this wide and even less get this wide on DX. This is the only lens from Nikon that gets this wide on DX. That's why it's so expensive. Despite what someone else said, this is not a pro lens. I'm not sure any of the DX lenses are pro lenses. It is very much consumer grade quality; it has cheaper construction and more distortion. The Nikon 12-24mm is semi-pro (better, more durable construction) and is accordingly more expensive. But this one has a wider angle of view (shorter focal length), and that's what will be key to most folks. Just be careful with it and the distortion can be corrected with software.
423082
The 18-105 is definitely the sharper lens. In my opinion, even at F4 throughout the entire range, you get amazing results. The 18-200, like most zooms, you have to really stop it down some to get the best results and the telephoto ends tends to get soft focus. It's a good all-in-one but definitely can notice the difference in performance and image quality especially in lower light situations.
1787338
Any thoughts for general / home photography? I have a Digital Rebel XSI and recently bought the 70-200 mm F2.8 IS version mainly to photograph school events without the annoying flash, and take closeups of my rapidly-growing kids. I have been going back and forth between the two lenses (24-70 F2.8 vs. 24-105 F4.0 IS) but my instinct is that F2.8 is much better than F 4 even with IS. Any guidance appreciated from a professional.
606484
I'm so glad there's something posted here - this is one of the lenses I'm considering getting my husband for Christmas. He has the Sigma 50-200mm lens right now and in my experience with it, it hasn't been too bad. Should he be happy with the 18-200?
797773
So this is a major concession in comparison with much less expensive cameras' focusing distances of one to two inches. Anyone with ideas as to why this is so. I used a Nikkormat with a Nikon macro lens for many years and have considered a Nikon digital body to allow continued use of the lens. Anyone with any thoughts on marrying such different technologies?
773408
So the 18-55 shouldnt be on?? i used it with my 18-55 but i do have a set focal legnth lens i could try too?
2054213
The 85 has an even tighter angle of view than the 50. It's a great portrait lens, as in you can get a good head and shoulders shot and put the background nicely out of focus, but I suspect you want to get more in your pictures, not less. The lower the number of a lens's focal length, the wider angle of view it has. Didn't your camera come with an 18-55 zoom? If not, look for one on eBay. That's the normal "kit" lens for cameras with the Rebel's sensor size. You can find them for under $100 there. Make sure you get one with the "IS" designation. That means it has image stabilization which will help keep shots sharps during hand-held exposures. The 85 has an even tighter angle of view than the 50. It's a great portrait lens, as in you can get a good head and shoulders shot and put the background nicely out of focus, but I suspect you want to get more in your pictures, not less. The lower the number of a lens's focal length, the wider angle of view it has. Didn't your camera come with an 18-55 zoom? If not, look for one on eBay. That's the normal "kit" lens for cameras with the Rebel's sensor size. You can find them for under $100 there. Make sure you get one with the "IS" designation. That means it has image... » Read More The 85 has an even tighter angle of view than the 50. It's a great portrait lens, as in you can get a good head and shoulders shot and put the background nicely out of focus, but I suspect you want to get more in your pictures, not less. The lower the number of a lens's focal length, the wider angle of view it has. Didn't your camera come with an 18-55 zoom? If not, look for one on eBay. That's the normal "kit" lens for cameras with the Rebel's sensor size. You can find them for under $100 there. Make sure you get one with the "IS" designation. That means it has image stabilization which will help keep shots sharps during hand-held exposures. « Show Less
183451
I shoot the same subjects and have been very pleased with the 18-250mm zoom. If you want a little more reach get the 55-300mm in place of the 18-250. With that choice I would then add the 18-55mm. I'm assuming you want to stay with Pentax brand. Neither zoom is "cheap" but then you get what you pay for. I chose the 18-250 because I hand hold the camera most of the time and here in the Pacific NW the light levels in the winter are pretty low. I doubt if I maxed out the 300mm (450mm equivalent) would I get a sharp image. Love the K20D by the way.
1770041
I am not sure if you are asking how low can you go as in is there lower then 1.8, BUT aperture can go as low as 1.2 which is EXPENSIVE. 1.8 is just fine if you are thinking cost effectiveness.
998314
I have an a6000 with the same kit lens. The SELP1650 max apperture @ 16mm F3.5 is sharper than the SEL16F28 @ F3.5. I think the kit lens OSS is helping give sharper results while the the SEL16F28 is just horrible at F2.8 to F5.0. I'm dissappointed with this lens. Stick with the kit lens otherwise maybe the Sony 20mm F2.8 is better.
325588
Solved! I asked this question in another Pentax forum, and this is what I found out: The kit lens in this bundle is actually the THIRD generation of the 18-55, which was released at the same time as the K7. So - an even better deal than I thought!(Or so I suppose. Haven't seen a review of the new kit lens, but it is unlikely to be a downgrade from the last one, I'm sure!)
944171
hi, I have a question.... I'm not a professional photographer and not want to be, but I would use as a hobby and will go to photography classes.... to take a good photos in the future... soooo... What should I choose... the kit with those lens (18-55mm and 75-300mm ) or only the body with 18-135mm lens ??? and another question... I want to take photos to my brother's surfing. its necessary to buy a 500mm lens??? thanks a lot!
801145
I would also like to hear about this from someone who knows. I was planning on getting the kit lens and buying the 70-300mm VR Nikkor lens with it thinking that the VR technology makes them superior, but most people are very unimpressed with the kit lens. One reviewer was raving about Sigma lenses for the D90, such as Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 AF APO DG OS HSM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras. I am now seriously rethinking my lens purchase plan.
1864063
I'm a hobbyist. I'd like to upgrade from the 28-135mm to the 24-105mm, but I'm afraid of spending this much and getting a lens that isn't a "good copy." I'm just not expert enough to know if a lens needs to be recalibrated or something. Is it best for someone like me to buy local and ask the camera store to evaluate the lens sharpness? Or buy from someone like B&H; and ask them to evaluate it before they ship it to me? I resell a lot of lenses, too, and I wouldn't want to resell it some day and have someone complain it wasn't sharp.
542012
I think Tom's answer is the right think to do, I was photographing off road races the last week and as. A test bring my Oly epl 3 with two prime MD lenses a 50 and 200, using the same adapter and works surprisingly GOOD, if you try everything and doesn't work may be its defective! good Luck always here to help if you need.
1019877
I did NOT buy the kit lens...bought camera with the 18-200mm lens instead....love this lens....a bit heavy but just great....no need for multiple lenses.
79348
I have used a 70-300mm EF and a 55-300mm AF lens with my D5100. Though the 70-300mm EF is a higher grade lens, I think that upon looking back at my results, the 55-300mm AF lens option gave me clearer images than the 70-300mm lens does. You will, however, be happy with either one. My 55-300mm lens was stolen last summer and I replaced it with a refurbished 70-300mm EF lens. If I were going to do it again, I'd probably get another 55-300mm lens. But on the other hand, the 70-300mm lens has a larger lens aperture and so it works better under lower light conditions than the 55-300mm AF lens. Life always seems to be about choices and trade-offs doesn't it.I hope this was helpful. I have used a 70-300mm EF and a 55-300mm AF lens with my D5100. Though the 70-300mm EF is a higher grade lens, I think that upon looking back at my results, the 55-300mm AF lens option gave me clearer images than the 70-300mm lens does. You will, however, be happy with either one. My 55-300mm lens was stolen last summer and I replaced it with a refurbished 70-300mm EF lens. If I were going to do it again, I'd probably get another 55-300mm lens. But on the other hand, the 70-300mm lens has a larger lens aperture and so it works better under lower light conditions than the 55-300mm AF lens.... » Read More I have used a 70-300mm EF and a 55-300mm AF lens with my D5100. Though the 70-300mm EF is a higher grade lens, I think that upon looking back at my results, the 55-300mm AF lens option gave me clearer images than the 70-300mm lens does. You will, however, be happy with either one. My 55-300mm lens was stolen last summer and I replaced it with a refurbished 70-300mm EF lens. If I were going to do it again, I'd probably get another 55-300mm lens. But on the other hand, the 70-300mm lens has a larger lens aperture and so it works better under lower light conditions than the 55-300mm AF lens. Life always seems to be about choices and trade-offs doesn't it.I hope this was helpful. « Show Less