D5100 Lens advice - 1 or more

[srinit9]

Guys, I got the new set with 2 lenses 1. 18-55mm - Good for bigger area coverage. 2. 55-200mm - large zoom. But when I went to an event, I have to change the lenses in between. How the other guys are facing this trouble? Is it common? or Is there any alternate quality lens with less budget? like 18-300mm? Any tips... Not sure whether Sigma/Tamor lenses are good quality compared to Nikkor lenses.

 

[GIULIAMAIKO]

Get a 2.8 lenses

 

[nfp]

There are some options out there. For the money, Tamron and Sigma are both great alternatives at more affordable prices. You can get lenses used from a few places like B&H for reasonable prices. Giuliamaiko is correct in that if you want a good quality lens that gives you more flexibility and better images, get a f2.8. However if you are looking for something a little more affordable and just want something for general use that will cover a broad rage, you can get 28-300 or 18-200 lenses in the f3.5-4.5 range.

 

[KmH]

One of the biggest advantages DSLR's have over P&S cameras is the ability to interchange lenses.

Superzoom lenses, like 18-200 mm, 18-270 mm, and the new 55-300 mm, have to accomodate many image quality killing design compromises to achieve their 11x+ zoom range.

Many photographers that need to shoot fast paced events, like field sports, that required using multiple lenses just mount the lenses on multiple camera bodies.

 

[otherprof]

I have the d5100 and the Nikon 18-200 (latest model, with VR) and have been consistently impressed with the results. I wonder if the "image killing" description of such superzooms isn't a little outmoded. I know there are compromises necessary in designing zoom lenses (and wide angles, and all other lenses) but I have yet find myself saying "Damn, if only this lens were sharper," e.g. The only reason I would consider another lens is if I needed a wider aperture or a wider angle, or just something lighter. This lens does weigh as much as the d5100 body. I decided on the lens after reading Ken Rockwell's review, and couldn't agree with him more about this replacing many lenses almost all the time. Has anyone had experience with this lens and been dissatisfied? Did I get lucky?

 

[flatflip]

I have the d5100 and the Nikon 18-200 (latest model, with VR) and have been consistently impressed with the results. I wonder if the "image killing" description of such superzooms isn't a little outmoded. I know there are compromises necessary in designing zoom lenses (and wide angles, and all other lenses) but I have yet find myself saying "Damn, if only this lens were sharper," e.g. The only reason I would consider another lens is if I needed a wider aperture or a wider angle, or just something lighter. This lens does weigh as much as the d5100 body. I decided on the lens after reading Ken Rockwell's review, and couldn't agree with him more about this replacing many lenses almost all the time. Has anyone had experience with this lens and been dissatisfied? Did I get lucky?

otherprof, I like the analogy of your experience with that lens. Please keep enjoying it and don't change. I wish I could be as content with something. I love my Tamron 28-75 for mid-zoom, sharp, low-light performance. However, now I need a wider lens and a longer lens but I don't like changing lenses. My Tamron is also a little expensive for me, making more lens purchases even further out of reach.

enough rant, keep having fun, Mick