Cheap lenses for Nikon

[Beth81]

Hey guys,

It's been a while since I've been on here, but I'm looking for a new lens.
I'm taking a trip to Vegas in June and I want a cheap lens. Right now all I have is the 18-55 lens and the 50mm lens. I was looking to get the 55 - 200 but that would be an inconvenience to have to tote all that equipment around. I decided to go for the 18 - 135mm but I was told that if I'm getting the 18-135 then I may as well go for the 18-200mm lens. So I need to know where I can find a cheap lens. Are the Tamrons and Sigmas that great? Also I have the Nikon d60 so I have to be sure that the lens I buy will fit this camera. Please help.....Thanks

 

[NateS]

Hey guys,

It's been a while since I've been on here, but I'm looking for a new lens.
I'm taking a trip to Vegas in June and I want a cheap lens. Right now all I have is the 18-55 lens and the 50mm lens. I was looking to get the 55 - 200 but that would be an inconvenience to have to tote all that equipment around. I decided to go for the 18 - 135mm but I was told that if I'm getting the 18-135 then I may as well go for the 18-200mm lens. So I need to know where I can find a cheap lens. Are the Tamrons and Sigmas that great? Also I have the Nikon d60 so I have to be sure that the lens I buy will fit this camera. Please help.....Thanks

Nikon 18-135 is going to be much better quality than any Tamron or Sigma 18-200 range. I'd much rather have a 18-135 over the Nikon 18-200 too. As for where to buy them, I'd recommend B&H.

 

[Beth81]

Will the Nikon 18-135mm fit the d60? I want it to be AF of course.

 

[AlexColeman]

Yes.

 

[moodi_94]

you should go to the 18-200mm

 

[ShutterSpeed]

you should go to the 18-200mm

agreed.

i don't see why 18-135 would be better than 18-200 unless you're going for a specific f/stop.

 

[NateS]

agreed.

i don't see why 18-135 would be better than 18-200 unless you're going for a specific f/stop.

image quality

 

[bdavis]

I second the 18-135...

I bought a Tamron 18-200 f/3.5 - 6.3 for my first lens on my D90 and it sucks. The color saturation is weak, its not as sharp as I want it to be, and the chromatic abberation is pretty bad too. Go with the Nikon...better investment

 

[biancarose]

Nikon just put this one out, it is a 35mm f/1.8G AF-S Prime lens and it is auto focus as well. I got mine on adorama for 213 in a kit with a UV lens and a cleaning kit. If you are going to get any lens, get the 55-200

 

[ShutterSpeed]

maybe since i haven't used a tamron, i don't know the difference.

 

[NateS]

maybe since i haven't used a tamron, i don't know the difference.

Has nothing to do with using "A" tamron, it has to do with THIS tamron. Some Tammys are good...some bad. Same goes with Nikon lenses. I have a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and it's sharpness/quality/colors, etc... rivals some of the higher end pro glass in my opinion.

Edit: Oh, and I'm not meaning to come across like I'm yelling...just differentiating between a tamron and this tamron since they aren't all created equal.

 

[bdavis]

I have a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and it's sharpness/quality/colors, etc... rivals some of the higher end pro glass in my opinion.

I agree 100% that is my #1 lens at the moment, I love it.

 

[ShutterSpeed]

Has nothing to do with using "A" tamron, it has to do with THIS tamron. Some Tammys are good...some bad. Same goes with Nikon lenses. I have a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and it's sharpness/quality/colors, etc... rivals some of the higher end pro glass in my opinion.

Edit: Oh, and I'm not meaning to come across like I'm yelling...just differentiating between a tamron and this tamron since they aren't all created equal.

you didn't come across that way. again, i currently only have 3 Nikon lenses. All work extremely well for me - so, I have no expertise regarding a range of lenses. The only lens i don't really like is the 18-55, but its nice to have those focal lengths - but the image quality is good.

 

[ANDS!]

Nikon 18-135 is going to be much better quality than any Tamron or Sigma 18-200 range. I'd much rather have a 18-135 over the Nikon 18-200 too. As for where to buy them, I'd recommend B&H.

This is not at all true. Or even close to being true. Have you actually USED either of these three lenses you're rating? Or is this the blanket "Well if its a first party lenses, it MUST be better than the competition."

Having said that, the Sigma 18-200 is currently rated better than the Nikon 18-200 on FredMiranda.com, and the Tamron 17-250 (cheaper than both the Nikon and Sigma) is the best reviewed of the three - and I suspect it has a lot to do with value versus cost. These superzooms are not going to be the sharpest knives in the drawer, and they aren't meant to be. Once you become comfortable with that fact, it becomes easier making a decision on an all purpose lens.

If you have the opportunity to go into a local camera store - say a Ritz, ask if you can try before you buy. I'm sure theyd be willing to let you mount the lenses they have on your body and go from there.

 

[photograham]

If you have the opportunity to go into a local camera store - say a Ritz, ask if you can try before you buy. I'm sure theyd be willing to let you mount the lenses they have on your body and go from there.

I agree this is by far the smartest thing to do. And then shop online for best price