borat
newbie
Reged: 02/10/2008
Posts: 1
|
|
Firstly hi to all on this forum I have gained loads of info just from reading your posts and so decided to join and purchase my first DSLR (cannot wait now)!
I have decided upon a D60 body only and then to add a Sigma 18-200mm os.
The reason for the post is to ask for advice on my choice of kit and if I am not making a schoolboy error somewhere?
With regard to my lense choice this has been based on me reading that it is a all rounder? Also not many websites list the "OS" lense as being HSM do I have to ensure that it is HSM or are they one of the same?
Apologies if the above does not make sense for any reason as I said very new to this world!
|
Learning
Ethelred the Ill-Named
Reged: 26/09/2006
Posts: 2467
Loc: Nottingham
|
|
Beware lenses with a maximum aperture of f6.3 at the narrow end. If you really want an 18-200 then get the Nikkor though it is a pain to carry. Personally I prefer the 16-85, although I own a Nikkor 18-200 (which I must get serviced by Nikon to correct front focus and loose zoom action). I understand that the 18-55 Nikkor VR kit lens is also highly thought of, and is way above the quality of most brand's kit lenses. Nikon's VR is very good.
Don't get me wrong. There's nothing wrong with Sigma. If you had asked about DX size wide angles then I would have been suggesting Sigma over Nikkor unless you were suggesting that budget was totally irrelevant.
Body only plus lens is more expensive than body plus lens kit.
Edited by Learning (02/10/2008 21:09)
|
Rhys
Sasquatch
Reged: 15/01/2004
Posts: 3374
Loc: York (home of the speedbump)
|
|
I'd probably get an 18-70 Nikkor (equiv to 28-105 in 35mm terms) I bought mine for £60 odd from fleabay. Then a 70-210. I know it's 2 lenses instead of the one all purpose job but for a carry around lens the 18-70 isn't too big. I suppose it all depends on which end of the focal length you will use the most.
--------------------
NRIPN (Officially Nuts..)
RGMP.co.uk (My Website.. getting there at last.)
Benchinistas.org.uk The home of Benchism
|
Gold1
No Glass
Reged: 26/05/2008
Posts: 103
|
|
What...? Confused already?
|
Learning
Ethelred the Ill-Named
Reged: 26/09/2006
Posts: 2467
Loc: Nottingham
|
|
Sorry if my reply was cryptic.
I simply wanted to say that the Sigma 18-200 OS has a maximum aperture at 200mm of f6.3, and that this is not good for fast and accurate AF. The equivalent Nikkor is a better lens but arguably has problems of its own. As general walk about lenses the 18-55 VR and 18-200 VR are good and the 16-85 VR is very very good.
As for the HSM OS question.
HSM lenses from Sigma and AF-S lenses from Nikon include an auto-focus motor; this is needed to achieve auto focus with a D40, D40x, and D60. It is not needed on a D50 or D80 and above. AF-S (and possibly HSM) may well be faster on cameras that do not require it. Nikon seem to be moving from camera body motors to lens motors. At the moment one just has to be careful about reading specifications during the transition.
OS (on Sigma), VR (on Nikon) and IS (on Cannon) are something else. These terms refer to stabilising the image by rapidly moving a group of lens elements under the control of a pair of accelerometers to overcome camera shake. The systems from these manufacturers are very effective although that of Cannon is irrelevant to you if you are getting a Nikon camera.
|
Benchista
Wich Tyler
Reged: 11/08/2000
Posts: 38335
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere, baby
|
|
Quote:
The equivalent Nikkor is a better lens
Not according to the reviews I've read - the Sigma appears considerably better, by some way the best lens of this spec.
--------------------
Nick
www.nbrphoto.com
Light and Shade II - the new blog
|
TimF
Taking it strictly
Reged: 30/07/2001
Posts: 16857
Loc: Herts/Beds border
|
|
Yeah, but you have a downer on Nikon don't you Nick!!! 
--------------------
Tim BSRIPN
You see something happening and you bang away at it. Either you get what you saw or you get something else--and whichever is better you print. - Garry Winogrand
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9546
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
Quote:
With regard to my lense choice this has been based on me reading that it is a all rounder? Also not many websites list the "OS" lense as being HSM do I have to ensure that it is HSM or are they one of the same?
According to the relevant page on Sigma UK website only the Nikon fit has the HSM motor. When ordering make sure you specify that you want Nikon fit.
As an all in one solution it should be OK. At the 200mm end the small maximum aperture is likely to mean the viewfinder is a touch dim and the AF may be a bit slow. As Nick (Benchista) says I have heard opinions that suggest the Sigma is actually a little better optically.
Personally I might be more inclined to get the D60 with the 18-55 VR lens (VR is Nikon's OS) and add the 70-300mm AF-S VR Nikkor which would ultimately give you longer reach, a better maximum aperture and I suspect an even more effective VR function.
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN 
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is more fun than one in the cupboard........
|
miked
veteran
Reged: 20/07/2005
Posts: 1458
Loc: Shropshire, England
|
|
I endorse the 18-70mm option that Rhys suggests. Later, should you want to add a lens with more reach check out the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 lens, which is a pretty good piece of kit, though it isn't image stabilised, is in my opinion, a better option than the Nikon 18-200mm f3.5-5.6mm or the Sigma 18-200mm. Try before you buy is the thing.
|
Benchista
Wich Tyler
Reged: 11/08/2000
Posts: 38335
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere, baby
|
|
Quote:
Yeah, but you have a downer on Nikon don't you Nick!!!
Not at all - simply stating a fact and correcting an erroneous statement. When this Nikkor came out, it was a revelation - things have moved on since then. As it is, it's still the second-best lens of its type on the market, it's just that the Sigma OS lens has taken the game a stage further. The cheaper Sigma without OS clearly isn't as good as the Nikon lens, though.
--------------------
Nick
www.nbrphoto.com
Light and Shade II - the new blog
|
RhodriRhosybol
newbie
Reged: 03/10/2008
Posts: 2
Loc: Anglesey
|
|
Hi everyone, just bought my first DSLR yesterday, a Nikon D40. Got a good price on e-bay, but the seller did not have the manual, plus other bits that I will have to find!
I'm having trouble putting the film into it, does anybody have the same model who can tell me where I'm going wrong?
I have a Reala 100 - 135-36 film, is this the right film to use?
Thanks
Rhodri
|
Benchista
Wich Tyler
Reged: 11/08/2000
Posts: 38335
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere, baby
|
|
Quote:
Hi everyone, just bought my first DSLR yesterday, a Nikon D40. Got a good price on e-bay, but the seller did not have the manual, plus other bits that I will have to find!
I'm having trouble putting the film into it, does anybody have the same model who can tell me where I'm going wrong?
I have a Reala 100 - 135-36 film, is this the right film to use?
Thanks
Rhodri
Yeah yeah, very funny.
--------------------
Nick
www.nbrphoto.com
Light and Shade II - the new blog
|
GeoffR
Reged: 31/05/2003
Posts: 3936
Loc: Bucks
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Yeah, but you have a downer on Nikon don't you Nick!!!
Not at all - simply stating a fact and correcting an erroneous statement. When this Nikkor came out, it was a revelation - things have moved on since then. As it is, it's still the second-best lens of its type on the market, it's just that the Sigma OS lens has taken the game a stage further. The cheaper Sigma without OS clearly isn't as good as the Nikon lens, though.
It may well be the best now but early Sigma OS lenses didn't work particularly well with Nikon cameras. Fortunately they have it sorted now. I would agree that the Nikon is second best but f6.3 is a little on the slow side.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
