Gah! Im stuck- Nikon Lens help (deciding)

[Dm3k1]

OK- Now im pretty much decided on the nikon d80. I think I am going to pick up the 55-200mm VR lens for it ($250- good deal, though i can get the 70-300VR for 380 but i dont think ill use it)
My dillemma is if i go with the 55-200 what should i get as my low range, the kit that I can pick up (through my store) is the 18-135. If i go with that I feel that the 135-200 difference isnt worth the investment. SO I can save $190 and go with body only and pick up an extra lens. I'm thinking the 18-70 or the 18-55 both Nikons. However, If i go with the 18-70 the difference in price (250 extra) means that I could have just gotten the 18-135 for less and it just doesnt make much sense.

So basically i'm stuck- the 18-55 sounds like a good idea since it's very cheap online (kit buyers selling their lens etc.)

If you have ANY suggestions let me know, I'm getting the 50mm 1.8 as well. But let me know if there are any other ideas. I can also buy the 55-200 non VR for 135 (i think I like the idea of stabilization at 200mm though). If I could, I'd like to get another lens that is decent in the low range (18-28 to 50-80) that has a pretty low F-stop (better than the kit lens) if I could for a resonable price. I'm getting the 50mm for 105- maybe I can scratch that if I find something else reasonable.

Sorry for the long explanation- These prices are my employee prices (thats why they are low- except for the 55-200VR)

PLEASE IM STUCK- ANY SUGGESTIONS WELCOME

 

[spyder]

first of all, great choice in camera! and if you have the money you may want to look into the nikon 18-200mm f3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR DX lense. its pricy but covers all the ranges you are looking for plus it has all the upgrades. and also you dont have to change lenses. this guy wrote a great review about it. http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18200.htm

 

[Dm3k1]

Thanks for the comment and suggestion. Yeah that is one of my options- It's on the high side of my price range at ~630$ (employee) however I am scared of remorse if I dive into it that much for one lens (granted, it IS an option I have been considering due to the versitility)

 

[Dm3k1]

Another one that seems interesting to me now is the 24-85mm 3.5 from reviews it is a very promising lens (better at wide open, sharp pictures)

 

[daybreak]

I hear very good things about the 18-135, and I heavily considered it over the 18-200VR (ended up winning some extra cash at the casino and decided on the 18-200VR). If you can, you might want to stick with the 18-55 kit lens and wait until you can afford the 18-200VR.

IfI were in your shoes i'd probably get the 18-135 kit and skip the 55-200VR and get the 70-300VR .

 

[hacksaw35]

I've also got a D80 and love it. I just ordered the 70-300 VR lens, it has got plenty of positive reviews. For my lower end....after flop-floping several times I decided to go with the Sigma 17-70 macro lens. It doesn't come in until Monday...I'm excited to go take some Macro shots, and still have the ability for wide angle shots.

 

[Dm3k1]

Thanks for the suggestions0 That 17-70(still spendy) does sound like a good option. As well as the 18-200 (still out of my price range)- I may just go with the 18-135 and wait, or go with the 18-55 and the 70-300 which saves me a little over the 18-200 (About $150). Is the 70-300VR better than the 55-200 as far as quality in the <200mm range? I've also heard good things about the 300VR What made you choose it?

I'm contemplating these options (dollar amounts are on top of the added amounts of the previous):
18-135
18-55 + 55-200VR - +$140
18-55 + 70-300VR - +$130
17-70 + 55-200VR - +$95
18-135 + 70-300VR - +$25
18-200 - +$30

Out of those what would you guys choose (or if you have any other suggestions on great lenses or lens combo's let me know. ) I do like the VR especially once I get in the 100-200 range- the f2.8 on the 17-70 is very interesting to me and it looks to have a very nice macro.
Now I am new, so if the VR isnt THAT important on the 55-200 I can get the 55-200 non VR for $115 less (but for that amount I'm assuming it is a plus)

Thanks for the suggestions, please keep them comming. I sell these all day and tell people what they want, but cant decide for myself!

 

[hacksaw35]

I have seen mixed reviews about the newer 55-200 VR lens. As far as the 70-300 most opinions I've seen are positive...the only thing I have heard is that it gets soft close to 300mm... fredmiranda.com has some good "mixed" reviews (I'm not a big fan of ken rockwell)... here's the reviews on the 70-300, also check out the reviews on B&H...
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=315&sort=7&cat=28&page=1

I would get the VR lens, it is better quality and the VR helps a lot when you are zooming out with no tripod.

 

[Dm3k1]

Thank you for the suggestion. I was starting to see the same thing as far as reviews go (only bad thing I hear about the 70-300 is as you said after 200 it gets soft. and just that it is expensive but again that isnt a problem with my discount)

So are you suggesting the 18-55 (standard kit lens) and the 70-300? or is the 18-135 that big of a difference to go with it an the 70-300. Or do you suggest another wide range lens instead of those?

 

[hacksaw35]

Like, I said I was in the same dilemma as you...I ended up going with the 17-70 Sigma, but I won't have it in my possesion until tommorrow...so I guess I will find out real soon.
By the way, I started out with a Nikon 17-55 2.8 and sold that to buy both of these lenses...even though several of the experts on tpf advised against it...but, I am a "poor college student" and wanted some more range. So, now I can shoot wide angle, macro, and zoom to 300mm. Now, i just have to worry about the difference in quality & not having constant aperture???

 

[Dm3k1]

^ being in your position I would be doing the same thing. I am as well a poor college student.

That said, and since I have no lenses and no body (so it is all up-front money out of my pocket) I think i'll probably go with the 18-55 and the 70-300VR. Probably throw away the 18-55 in a year or so when I have the money for a nicer lens. I really wish I could get something that focuses faster/ has better aperture then the kit lens without spending 400+ - I may look used if I can find something.

If anyone has any more suggestions PLEASE, I feel quite a bit better but im still tearing my hair out as I have caviar taste on a McDonald's (their good stuff) budget. I dont mind spending for both the 18-55 and the 70-300 and maybe a bit more, again the 50mm i'm pretty much set on.

 

[DSLR noob]

Sorry to but in a big mean nasty Canon user but I wouldn't get any of those lenses(in the first 3 or 4 posts) if I just shelled out money for a D80. They're all low-consumer grade variable aperture superzooms. They cover such a wide range with mediocre, (sometimes unacceptable) quality, rather than a short range with great quality. They're built cheaply, and they have low resale value.......... I only have an entry level Canon a kit lens, and the super cheap 50 mm 1.8 (the Nikon equivalent I reccomend, you'll love it) but I know that my setup isn't serious yet either. You can get amazing photos with any camera, any lens combo, but you'll run into limitations so often with a cheaper telephoto. I say get the D40 instead of the d80, and spend money on something you'll REALLY like, like a Tameron 17-50 f/2.8 and maybe a 70-200 f/4

 

[Dm3k1]

I actually just stumbled on a craigslist post... 24-70mm, 70-200 2.8 Sigma EX. Both 2.8 both seem to get pretty nice reviews he wants 700 for both of them ( i beleive the first you can pick up for about 4 or 350 new and the second for about 900) sounds like an excellent deal! Just seems like they might be a little big for normal use.

Maybe pick up the d40x and those? I think I'll still go with the D80 because through my accommadations the difference between the two bodies is only 180$ (and the d40 I have to buy it with the 18-55.. but I do save $310 over the d80- but in the future that isnt much in my mind for the convenience of changing the manual settings and the 10MP which is still nice if I do need to crop a LOT)

 

[Dm3k1]

I'm pretty sure he sold it, it was posted a week ago

 

[Dm3k1]

In Response to DSLR Noob, I am a beginner arn't those good options for starting out along with the 50mm fixed and then when or if I get really into it and need better stuff get a new lens Like that tamron or Sigma (that was recommended) to replace the 18-55. I think the 70-300VR is all I will need for awhile since I dont think Telephoto up that high will be used as much and I hear it is a pretty good lens unless you want to carry around a massive lens.