Newbie wanting more zoom!

[picgranny]

I have a D3100 and a kit lens, 18-55, a 55-200 and a fixed 35mm. I am looking at a Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.6 DC OS HSM auto Focus. I am at the zoo alot, and like wildlife photography and can't seem to get enough zoom. Any suggestions? Thanks.

 

[The_Traveler]

any mega-zoom will sacrifice quality for convenience.
You already can get to 200 and the extra 60 won't do much.
Buy a prime 300 or 400 and a teleconverter if you really want the reach.

 

[tirediron]

Alternatively, you might consider selling the 55-200 and replacing it with a better quality 70-300.

 

[joealcantar]

I would consider renting a lens at say a Calumet where the rental fee goes towards the purchase of a lens. Talk to the manager and see if you can work out a deal to apply any rental fee towards the purchase.
70-300 sounds like a nice range but it is not the same quality as the 300mm primes etc. only thing about the prime is that you have to compose with your feet. Also consider a 1.4 converter on a prime.
-
Shoot well, Joe

 

[emoxley]

A 250mm zoom isn't going to give you any more of a noticable difference than the 200mm, I don't think. You'll probably need to go to a 400mm or 500mm for a real noticable difference. I have a Tamron 70-300mm, and find myself wanting more zoom too, even though I love this lens. I don't notice a big difference between the 200mm and 300mm length on this lens. Of course there's some difference, but is it enough? I'm going to the NC Zoo next Friday, and will see how the 300mm does for me. NC Zoo advertises itself as being one of the largest "natural habitat" zoos in the country, so I'm sure I'll find out if 300mm is enough zoom.

I'm really looking forward to this trip to the zoo. Last time we went was almost 30 yrs. ago. It's changed a lot since then, I'm sure. I didn't have a camera at all, back then. I'm hoping to take a lot of pics this time. My wife said that this morning on tv, the weatherman said something about a possible hurricane this next week! That would be just my luck! Ruin a trip I've waited almost 30 yrs. for! I've got my fingers crossed.............

 

[picgranny]

Have fun at the zoo and I would be interested in how the Tamron 70-300 works for zoom!

 

[The_Traveler]

If you are actually serious about wildlife - and know it - then the Nikon AFS 300 will give you spectacular results and will be a keeper no matter what body you use.

It is big bucks ($1200 from BH) but well worth it if you stick with wildlife.
I have an acquaintance who uses it for everything from portraits to reptiles and gets outstanding results.

LL

 

[picgranny]

My understanding is that the 70-30 and the 55-200 only have about 4 or 5 times zoom but the Sigma 18-250 has 11 times zoom. Does that make sense?

 

[The_Traveler]

My understanding is that the 70-30 and the 55-200 only have about 4 or 5 times zoom but the Sigma 18-250 has 11 times zoom. Does that make sense?

That true BUT to shoot wildlife you are concerned with the ultimate amount of magnification and what you have now is 200 mm (about 4x of 'normal' sight). An 18-250 zooms from a wide angle to a medium long lens.

From your statement it seems you don't understand some of the basic issues of cameras and lenses .
You should get a basic photography book and learn about lenses and magnification before you spend any more money.

 

[KmH]

Yes, but they all still top out at about 200, 250, or 300 mm

250 mm ÷ 18 mm = 13.8x zoom

70 mm ÷ 30mm =4.3x zoom

55 mm ÷ 200 mm = 3.6x zoom

But 300 mm still has 100 mm more reach than 200mm does.

To achieve 13.8 times zoom, many design compromizes have to be made that negatively impact image quality. Most of the negative image quality impact happens at the extremes of the lenses adjustment ranges. The same happens to Nikon's 18-200 mm superzoom lens.

All of the supezoom lenses are jack-of-all-trades, masters-of-none lenses because of their 10x+ zoom range and design compromises.

 

[Railphotog]

My understanding is that the 70-30 and the 55-200 only have about 4 or 5 times zoom but the Sigma 18-250 has 11 times zoom. Does that make sense?

No it doesn't. The "times" only means the longest length is 11 times the shortest length. It has nothing to do with actual magnification of the image. A 250mm lens is only maginally longer than a 200, won't make a whole lot of difference. Look at the longest length of a zoom range to figure out how powerful it may be. And keep in mind if you get even longer lenses without image stabilisation, then camera shake can affect the sharpness of your photos. It takes a steady hand and good shutter tripping ability to get decent shots with long lenses, especially in low light conditions.

 

[CCericola]

I think you are comparing apples to oranges. Remember the 18-250 has a11x zoom but it starts at 18 which is a negative zoom.

Sent from my iPad using PhotoForum

 

[table1349]

This should solve the problem: Sigma 200-500mm f/2.8 EX DG APO IF Autofocus Lens 597306 B&H

 

[KmH]

One of the best long lens values around is Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 AF APO DG OS HSM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

The 150-500 is a daylight only lens. it doesn't have a wide enough aperture to shoot at night with. But, lenses that have that kind of reach that you can shoot at night cost a lot more.
Sigma 200-500mm f/2.8 EX DG APO IF Autofocus Lens 597306 B&H The Sigma 200-500 mm f/2.8 also weighs 35 lbs.

 

[The_Traveler]

There is the http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photograph...es/zoomsMF/Sigma3501200APO/sigma3501200mm.htm

or the http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/zoomsMF/12001700mm.htm

for those wanting ultimate reach at any cost.