Need a quick lens recommendation!

[103734]

Ok, I have the following lenses.

10-24mm Tamron
50mm Nikon
80-200mm f2.8 Nikon

I need a lens that can shoot in the 20-30mm range, the 10-24mm covers that but that lens is too soft for my tastes and I really only use it at 10mm for landscape shots, so if I want to take pictures of people or anything else I am stuck using the 50mm which is often not wide enough for what I need.

I was looking at Nikon 16-85mm and Nikon 18-200mm, the 18-200 seems like overkill since I have the 80-200mm that I would rather use if going over 80mm but many people seem to be suggesting it over the 16-85mm.

What do you guys think? I need to order/buy ASAP.

 

[JDDavis]

I'm guessing you have a DX body since you are considering the 16-85 and the 18-200?

I'll get it out of the way and say I'd go for the 24-70 or the 17-55 (DX) in that order if money was no option.

If it is then I would go with the 18-200 even with the overlap. For what it is I think the 18-200 is a great lens. Not pro quality but great. You might only want it for the 24-80 range but I think you'd find it's a great all around lens and a great option for a day you only want to carry a single lens. I think the 18-200 does really well up to maybe 135 and then it starts to fade off but for the money I've been really happy with it.

 

[Shacklebolt]

I'm guessing you have a DX body since you are considering the 16-85 and the 18-200?

I'll get it out of the way and say I'd go for the 24-70 or the 17-55 (DX) in that order if money was no option.

If it is then I would go with the 18-200 even with the overlap. For what it is I think the 18-200 is a great lens. Not pro quality but great. You might only want it for the 24-80 range but I think you'd find it's a great all around lens and a great option for a day you only want to carry a single lens. I think the 18-200 does really well up to maybe 135 and then it starts to fade off but for the money I've been really happy with it.

I'd definitely vote 17-55 f/2.8, if you have a DX body, which it sounds like you do. Between the 10-24, 17-55 f/2.8, 50mm (f/1.8/1.4 I'm sure), and 80-200 mm f/2.8, I don't think you'd need to buy any news lenses for a loooong time.

 

[ManhattanPrjct]

I use the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 VC and it absolutely crushes it at those FLs (it's also very good at 17mm). Tamron uses a unique tri-axis vibration control technology that in my experience is better than Nikon's. Tamron has also stepped up their rebates to stay competitive with Sigma, so you can save yourself some serious cash by considering it. Might as well try out Sigma's too, but I can tell you that I don't regret my purchase one bit.

 

[103734]

Doh sorry I have a D90. And I would like to keep it sub $700 before tax.

 

[gnd]

Get a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 with or without VR (the version without the VR is sharper than the one with VR, at least according to the tests). I have the non-VR version (since my camera features sensor-shift stabilization) and I absolutely love the sharpness. The sharpness is comparable to the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS.

 

[OreoCookie]

I'd suggest either the Tamron or Sigma's 30 mm f/1.4 if you want a prime.

 

[leighonigar]

I'd suggest either the Tamron or Sigma's 30 mm f/1.4 if you want a prime.

Frankly, if you were going to get the 30mm f/1.4 sigma you may as well get the 35mm f/1.8 Nikkor, save money and get better sharpness.

 

[OreoCookie]

Frankly, if you were going to get the 30mm f/1.4 sigma you may as well get the 35mm f/1.8 Nikkor, save money and get better sharpness.

I'm quite pleased with the sharpness (especially in the center). Plus, you gain almost a full stop, the extra money is well-spent in my opinion.

 

[103734]

Thanks I ended up getting the Tamron

 

[compuwar]

Thanks I ended up getting the Tamron

Wish I'd see this earlier, I'd have advised getting the 20-35mm.

Paul

 

[leighonigar]

I'm quite pleased with the sharpness (especially in the center). Plus, you gain almost a full stop, the extra money is well-spent in my opinion.

Oh yes, I'm not badmouting the lens. For me the value equation would have come down on the side of the nikkor, that's all. Especially as I loathe Sigma's finish (though I have all sigma lenses atm) and sigma's QA is supposedly a bit shoddy (though mine are fine).