What is the difference in quality that makes this lens about $200 more than the other Nikon 1 NIKKOR 10-100mm, which is faster at the wide angle end?
1312203
This is a video lens the zoom is on the lens and it is truly smooth. I use it as my main lens.
1312204
This is the first 10-100mm lens I have ever bought and I purchased it specifically for a Nikon 1 J3 so I did not 'shop it' at all. I am very happy w/the lens but am not conversant enough to explain why. Sorry.
1120722
AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G: Not a wide angle lens, but for the price ($200) you really cannot beat it for speed (f1.8), weight, and sharpness. I have much more expensive lenses but the 35mm lives on my camera body at least 50% of the time.
1082258
Im not certain on the specifics, but from my personal experience, nikkor was a little bit slower than a 70-200 cannon i used recently. Not a great deal, but in high velocity sports it could be substantial. Sorry i cant be much help tho :)
2220129
This is by far the best wide angle lens I have ever used. It is incredible as to what you can capture with this lens. I have a D80 and use this lens for group shots of the grandkids, gorgeous views of the water and woods across from my home, wildlife, etc. You will not be dissapointed with this lens. It is well worth the money spent on it.
91766
There are two different versions. I assume by "the $200 one" you mean the LA-EA1 or LA-EA3. These lens have extremelyt limited and slow autofocus, they do, however, support the rest of the lens electronics, so they are better then a dumb adapter. They are not something you want if you plan on using autofocus, however.The LA-EA2 and LA-EA4 both support full speed (DSLR speed) autofocus with almost every single A-mount lens. They even have a drive motor for the older lenses that do not have one built in.The difference between the LA-EA1/2 and LA-EA3/4 is that the 3/4 are built with full frame sensors in mind (like the upcoming A7 and A7R). If you have an NEX-7, you can use the E1 or E2 without worry. There are two different versions. I assume by "the $200 one" you mean the LA-EA1 or LA-EA3. These lens have extremelyt limited and slow autofocus, they do, however, support the rest of the lens electronics, so they are better then a dumb adapter. They are not something you want if you plan on using autofocus, however.The LA-EA2 and LA-EA4 both support full speed (DSLR speed) autofocus with almost every single A-mount lens. They even have a drive motor for the older lenses that do not have one built in.The difference between the LA-EA1/2 and LA-EA3/4 is that... » Read More There are two different versions. I assume by "the $200 one" you mean the LA-EA1 or LA-EA3. These lens have extremelyt limited and slow autofocus, they do, however, support the rest of the lens electronics, so they are better then a dumb adapter. They are not something you want if you plan on using autofocus, however.The LA-EA2 and LA-EA4 both support full speed (DSLR speed) autofocus with almost every single A-mount lens. They even have a drive motor for the older lenses that do not have one built in.The difference between the LA-EA1/2 and LA-EA3/4 is that the 3/4 are built with full frame sensors in mind (like the upcoming A7 and A7R). If you have an NEX-7, you can use the E1 or E2 without worry. « Show Less
1003721
This is a far superior lens. The sharpness is pretty impressive. I have used the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS MK I and the Tamron is better than that one also. Haven't used the Canon MK II version yet but I am extremely happy with the Tamron
1046019
The link for the comparison at cameralabs.com is not applicable because it tested the Sigma 18-200 DC prior to the release of the OS version. The OS version is much better optically than its predecessor and also includes HSM (High Speed Motor). I have read test reviews and comparisons at other sites such as popphoto that indicate the Sigma is sharper and has less distortion than the Nikon 18-200 VR, but they also state it is slightly louder. I just received my Sigma 18-200 OS today and have done limited testing, but I can tell you the AF and OS noise are not bad (the OS chirps when it turns on and off). The Sigma AF is louder than my Nikon 18-135 (w/SWM), but quieter than the AF on my Nikon 50mm 1.8 prime (wo/SWM). The HSM AF seems just as fast as my Nikon lenses. The build quality feels better than the Nikon 18-135; the zoom is smooth and solid. The first things I tested today were barrel distortion and OS functionality. Barrel distortion is present at the wide end on ALL wide-range zooms, but the Sigma controls it better. The Sigma has noticeably less barrel distortion at 18mm than my Nikon. This benefit of the Sigma is moot really, because barrel distortion of both lenses can easily be corrected with software. The OS functions very well, I can shoot hand-held down to 1/10th of a second with no blur. I will post again after I have time to do more testing.
1464247
Nikon Inc. AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED this lens is spendy but you will not need any others it covers just about anything you need the others are great but this has distance as well as close it is wide angle and has nice light. it is spendy but does the trick in lots of different ways. I have 5 lense this is always what I use.
1582810
I wouldn't say your bound to get way better quality vs this lens kompared to a 18-55mm. That all depends of kourse on the quality of the lens your using. But i will say this lens is amazing and has great picture quality. In a wedding setting i would definitely recommend simply because wedding pictures usually deal with shots that envolved groups of people. And they really weren't lying when they said "wide angle" regarding the description of this lens. It remarkable how much massive space this lens is able to kapture and fit into a single shot. Hope this waz informative for u.
684751
Well, considering your ranges, I think for you it would be nice to have some more options in the wide angle range. For you I recommend the Sigma 10-20mm DSH. This one actually comes at about $470, which is more than half for the comparable Nikon 12-24mm and it is wider by 2mm; which is a lot at this range. Sigma is of course, a third party lens manufacturer. But I assure you that with some research and inspection, you can find a copy that meets your satisfaction. They are other wide angles, but so far sigma comes with the widest of the wide for your camera body. By the way, if I was you, I would trade in your 28-80 and 18-55, keep the 50mm lens and if your 18-200mm happens to be the Nikon 18-200mm DX VR, of course keep it too. When you first start out with SLR systems, you think you want a bunch of lenses, but in reality, you don't. You will be more than satisfy with a set of tree or even two lenses that meet all your photographic needs. Finally, I will state that there is no nicer artistic tool than the exaggeration of perspective that wide angle lenses may provide you.
1346884
The 50mm f/1.4 doesn't offer enough of an image quality boost over the 50mm f/1.8 to justify buying it. The 85mm f/1.8 offers faster ring type USM focusing, the 50mm f/1.8 does not. The 85mm f/1.8 has a rich and creamy bokeh that is as good or better than the 50mm f/1.4. While still being a great traditional portrait lens, the extra reach of the 85m f/1.8, makes it great for concerts, plays, and gymnasium sports. I like to say the 85mm f/1.8 is the lens that every parent should own (and anyone who wants to sell photos to parents too).
759247
Even better. The 1.4 is rock solid compared to the flimsy 1.8, and slightly faster. Ten times as expensive, but may be worth it. If you're still thinking of adding a new zoom to your arsenal, look at the 24-105L, as well. It's pretty much a coin toss, as far as IQ, with the 24-70L, but it adds IS. So, it's one stop slower, but it gains about 3 stops due to the IS, so it's actually better for low-light than the "faster" lens. And longer, too.
1509565
I have shot 3 weddings with this lens and I haven't had a problem with it, it's been great. I have used the 70-200 and its just a bit faster that the 80-200 but I can't really tell the difference.
1939948
Truthfully I think the 50mm 1.4 lens is better made and the resulting picture quality is great. I think it is definitely worth it to spend the extra cash to purchase the lens.
1408820
This lens is equivalent to Nikon's 55mm f 1.8 lens. It is considered a "Normal" lens meaning it 'sees' like the human eye. While it can used in daylight and low light it is NOT a wide angle lens. If wide angle is what you are interested in use the 10 mm N series Nikkor lens or one of the zoom lenses such as the 10 mm to 30 mm zoom or the 10 mm to 100 mm zoom, which is my preference.
984156
I am mostly using this lens for outdoors pictures (landscapes) on a Nikon D7000, since almost 6 months. I have taken a thousands pictures. Image quality has been so far most of time superb with my D7000. For sure, this lens are perfect choice for D7100 as well ... but don't expect the same performance of a Nikkor 17-35 2.8 or a Nikkor 14-24 2.8. You get what you pay for.
466983
I don't have the 200mm, so can't compare. I have no complaints on this lens, if that helps.