Lens Recommendation Requested

[John357]

I am interested in buying a Nikon D300 as soon as they become available in November. As for the lense, I currently own a Nikon DX 18-70 F3.5 and would like to buy another lense for sports, such as soccer. However, I am uncertain whether to buy the Nikon 70-300 F4.5 VR (good lense to leave on for most occassions) or the 18-200 F3.5 VR. Can someone please offer some advice? Thanks

 

[Buszaj]

hmm, you may want to consider the latter more because it is a faster lens, so you'll be able to freeze action faster. but the first choice may also not be a bad choice because even though it is a fraction of a stop slower, there is more reach, and you should still be able to freeze the action. i don't look at nikon stuff, but just my thoughts.

 

[JIP]

First I have to ask, if you don't know what kind of lens to buy for it are you really ready for the D300. But to get past that if you cannot afford a 2.8 lens to go with the D300 mabye you should just syick to a 200 and save the money to buy a proper lens. I am definately not a fan of the 18-200 but I can admit that it has its place but that place is NOT!!!! in front of a D300.

 

[John357]

Would this be a more respectable lens for the D300? If so, is there an issue regarding it 1) not being a DX lens, or 2) not being the latest generation of Vibration Reduction?

 

[Buszaj]

i don't know nikon, but that lens will be fast enough, and will look nice.
keep researching

 

[JIP]

Yep Great lens!!!! no DX issues it is extremely sharp and a great selection for the D300. After that try the 17-55 2.8 http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/300490-USA/Nikon_2147_17_55mm_f_2_8G_ED_IF_AF_S.html .

 

[johnmh]

Have used both the 70-300 VR and 18-200 VR for kid's soccer with a D70 and D200. Gotten decent results with both.

However, the 70-200 2.8 is in a very different league...... mmmmmmmmmmm

Only issue is the cost...... and that is NOT an insubstantial issue. You can own the 18-200VR, 70-300VR and a few more for what a 70-200 2.8VR is going to cost you.

The 70-200 is a pro lens and pricey. Hard to justify for casual use, but if you're already going with a D300, that may not be an issue..... note that availability may be an issue at times given Nikon's shipping schedule. If they underestimate demand and you're buying late in the current cycle, you may be out of luck (or paying a premium) until resupply.

Just a note - the 70-200 is a LOT heavier and bigger....... you WILL notice the difference - especially since a 300 is heavier than D70/80's......

But it IS a GREAT lens...... will be trying it out with a TC17 - which gives it a little more reach than the 70-300

 

[Garbz]

latest generation of VR? People did shoot sports back before the invention of VR. Don't a) if the shutter is too slow to use without VR and you're shooting sport the people will be blurry, and b) it's heavy. You won't want to use this hand held for too long anyway.

The 70-200 f/2.8 is a pro grade lens and to be perfectly frank, based on the questions you are asking you don't sound like you need it. The 18-200 is also NOT faster than the 70-300. It's only faster at 18mm. If you look closely it's f/5.6 at 200, and not sharp at all.