A Do-All lens or a mixed bag?

[Santa Gertrudis]

What do you prefer? Obviously a do-all is more convenient, but is it worth it? Is swapping lenses all the time worth it? I've got the Nikon 18-200 VRII right now and the versatility is great, but I'm considering covering that focal range with a few lenses instead. Thinking about these:

Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6
Sigma 24-70 f/2.8
Sigma 70-200 f/2.8

What are your thoughts?

 

[JimmyO]

You would be better off with keeping the 18-200 and grabbing a prime or 2

 

[Santa Gertrudis]

I have thought about that too. Which primes do you think would best compliment what I have?

 

[bahandi]

What focal length do you find yourself shooting in most?

 

[JimmyO]

Well seeing as you shoot a d5000 your pretty limited. FOR SURE grab the 35mm 1.8, its an amazing lens and a hell of a bargain.

When i shot a D40 i shot with a sigma 10-20,18-50, and 70-200 and slowly each of them turned out to be **** =[. So my recomendation is to stay away from Sigma.

But a simple 35mm prime + 18-200 should cover tons and tons of shots.

 

[iAstonish]

The 50mm f1.8 is cheap and is a great prime.

I use the 35mm f1.8 to compliment my Sigma 18-250mm HSM

Its really a matter of preference and which range you find yourself shooting at the most, ya know.

 

[Santa Gertrudis]

Well, I tend to shoot either at 18 (wishing I could go wider) or from around 80-200 (wishing I could go longer pretty often)

Another thought was to sell the 18-200 and get the Sigma 10-20 and 18-50, and the Nikon 70-300. I would have better quality in the short range, and I could reach a little farther.

 

[JimmyO]

Why do you want more lenses? Do you need faster lenses?

 

[iAstonish]

Well, I tend to shoot either at 18 (wishing I could go wider) or from around 80-200 (wishing I could go longer pretty often)

Another thought was to sell the 18-200 and get the Sigma 10-20 and 18-50, and the Nikon 70-300. I would have better quality in the short range, and I could reach a little farther.

I think that your 18-200mm VR is a great all purpose lens and would agree with Jim on adding some primes. Like the others asked is their a reason you want new lenses?

 

[JimmyO]

Yeah i really feel like your gonna be singing that "Dont know what ya got till its gone" song if you get rid of the 18-200. I mean there people who sell all there lenses to buy just that one. As a professional photographer its not amazing becuase its not very fast, but it surely is the most versatile lens money can buy these days

 

[iAstonish]

Well, I tend to shoot either at 18 (wishing I could go wider) or from around 80-200 (wishing I could go longer pretty often)

Another thought was to sell the 18-200 and get the Sigma 10-20 and 18-50, and the Nikon 70-300. I would have better quality in the short range, and I could reach a little farther.

The faster fstop will be great for faster action and low light situations, but I'm not really convinced that the optical image provided by the lenses would differ all that much. Having a good all purpose lens is VERY convenient. I would suggest building around that lens to fit your needs. You already have the range right now in a single lens, so selling that to get three lenses to make up for it wouldn't make much sense unless you feel like the 18-200mm is holding you back.

 

[Santa Gertrudis]

I don't really feel like it's holding me back, I just want the best shots possible. I thought maybe faster lenses instead would be best. I'm going to take yall's advice and keep what I have and build around it. Sounds like some primes and maybe a fast zoom (70-200 f/2.8) would be better for me.

Thanks a lot guys! Talked me out of spending a big chunk of change!

 

[iAstonish]

I don't really feel like it's holding me back, I just want the best shots possible. I thought maybe faster lenses instead would be best. I'm going to take yall's advice and keep what I have and build around it. Sounds like some primes and maybe a fast zoom (70-200 f/2.8) would be better for me.

Thanks a lot guys! Talked me out of spending a big chunk of change!

Speed isn't really that much of an issue unless you're seriously needing it. I shoot NCAA basketball with the sigma 18-250mm f3.5-6.3 and I have had excellent results. Try boosting your iso a bit if you feel that you need to make up for your fstop.

Plus like Jim and I said, grab some primes if you really want some faster glass, because they are very reasonably priced in comparison to a zoom with that low of an fstop. I believe that you will find that your primes will have their place, but your 18-200mm will be your workhorse lens. It really is a great lens from what I have heard, so take the time to find out what it can and can't do before you consider selling it.

 

[JimmyO]

For the record the sigma 70-200 is noticably soft until around f/4-5.6 so although its faster dont expect the shots to look much better

 

[iAstonish]

For the record the sigma 70-200 is noticably soft until around f/4-5.6 so although its faster dont expect the shots to look much better

Indeed. Faster doesn't necessarily mean better optical images. You're 18-200mm is pretty respected in the all purpose category for its optical ability.