Is glass this good kinda' wasted on a consumer-grade frame like the D5500. Thx in advance
1125278
Definitely not! This, by far, has been my best lens purchase. I bought this for my D3100, & it works wonders. I've used it for a wedding & several shoots. It's never let me down. I use it witH my d7100 & it does just as well. Great first glass purchase.
1125279
This is a kinda "which should come first, the chicken or the egg?" question. Make the investment of a very good lens, then later, when you can afford it, upgrade your camera body.
1125280
You will never waste money on a good lens! If it will fit on your camera, and you can afford it, go for it. This lens for me is razor sharp and It's my first choice when shooting.
1125281
No I don't think so. If you put that lense on a camera that is not FULL frame, you just gain distance. If you put it on FULL frame, you get a good clear shot. I like the lens.
1645974
J. Perez --There is a lot of fanboyism going on at the beginning of this thread... and it's passed off as fact to be worse.If you're looking at these two cameras consider your needs. You already have nice canon glass so you may be better served going with the 5d II. What do you shoot? If it's sports I would definitely say lean to the D700 or look at the 7d (or 1d III as you mentioned). I personally think the 5D II has the best IQ of the bunch, but that is an opinion.Really, the two cameras mentioned here are a different beast. It's like comparing mac laptops to windows desktops. First decide if you use your camera more for sports or portraits then decide if you want the canon or nikon. J. Perez --There is a lot of fanboyism going on at the beginning of this thread... and it's passed off as fact to be worse.If you're looking at these two cameras consider your needs. You already have nice canon glass so you may be better served going with the 5d II. What do you shoot? If it's sports I would definitely say lean to the D700 or look at the 7d (or 1d III as you mentioned). I personally think the 5D II has the best IQ of the bunch, but that is an opinion.Really, the two cameras mentioned here are a different beast. It's like comparing mac laptops to... » Read More J. Perez --There is a lot of fanboyism going on at the beginning of this thread... and it's passed off as fact to be worse.If you're looking at these two cameras consider your needs. You already have nice canon glass so you may be better served going with the 5d II. What do you shoot? If it's sports I would definitely say lean to the D700 or look at the 7d (or 1d III as you mentioned). I personally think the 5D II has the best IQ of the bunch, but that is an opinion.Really, the two cameras mentioned here are a different beast. It's like comparing mac laptops to windows desktops. First decide if you use your camera more for sports or portraits then decide if you want the canon or nikon. « Show Less
1837555
I have the opteka and I'm real not happy with the quality of the pics. Talking with my repair guy the glass is not the best in quality and thats why the pics are of poor quality
506468
In same boat, Bob. I'm buying the D80. Cheaper, and less weight/bulk. I test drove a 30D and did not like the ergonomics. Have been waiting for a D70s replacement, and it's here!
1441507
i have the d80 with the 18-70 dx, the 70-300 ed, and the 50 1.8 d nikkors, plus the tokina 12-24 and the tamron 28-75 f/2.8. what glass you put on your d80 to start with should depend on intended uses and experience level. if all you want is an all-in-one lens, go for the 18-135 kit, unless you can afford the 18-200 vr. the 24-120 VR is another sweet after-market option if you go body-only and just want one lens, but you'd probably be better off, however, with either the 18-55 or the 18-70, plus the 55-200 vr. for the size, weight, and cost, they're very good for plastic consumer lenses. the downside is they're fairly slow for (D)SLR lenses, due to narrow apertures at the long end. if low-light photography or action sports is your bag, skip the nikkors altogether unless you can afford the 17-55 2.8 and/or the 70-200 VR. get the d80 body and grab a sigma or tamron 2.8. if w/a is your thing, i'd get one of the 18s (-55, -70, -135, -200) and pair it with the tokina 12-24 or the sigma 10-20. if you're more of a telephoto person, get the 18-55 or -70 and pair it with the inexpensive 70-300 non-vr g lens. the money you save over the ed or vr versions can go toward a good tripod -- unless you really think you're gonna be doing a lot of handheld shooting at 300mm. for macro and portrait work, consider again going body-only with the d80, getting the $100 50 1.8 prime, and maybe the sigma 30, the nikkor 60, and the tamron 90 to round out your selection, which would give you a nice, sharp range. if all of this seems too complicated, look at a fixed-zoom P&S or the d40/18-55 combo.
194933
Bill, there are a few variables... Do you plan to go to a FX sensor in the future (D700, D3)? Do you plan on hand-holding or will you be using a mono/tripod? Are you someone that must have the latest and greatest things? Personally I'm going for the VR II, I shoot a D90 now but want to have room to move to a FX camera without worrying about vignetting and edge sharpness. Plus after looking at some of the review pictures that people have posted, especially the side by side shots, I think the VR II is worth the extra $500
1695327
I agree it not a super/ ultra wide. I'm not sure that is it's best use anyways. It is as wide as I could find at f/1.8 at 18mm (27mm relative) at this price point with near perfect clarity. I use mine for indoor group shots and can tell you it is wide enough for that and the pictures are amazing with this glass. If you really want wide angle then I would consider prime lens.
624644
The short answer is "You get what you pay for." Not all glass is created equal. Less expensive lenses often prove to have inferior glass (greater distortion, higher chromatic dispersion, etc.) If your images don't require the kind of detail that higher priced lenses provide, then go with the less expensive lens.
2120273
Yes, way sharper, much faster AF, build quality are all so much better on this lens. Glass is more important than the camera, to certain degree of course, and it will retain it's value, the only drawback is once you get a pro lens you will never be ok with inferior optics again
2171075
I have two SB-910's, no problems. Much better refresh time than the SB-700 I have. I will keep up with the D800 fps with no problem.
1702191
I tried once, the Night Vision clip looked slippery as it did not have a good hold since it was framless, the vision looked fine but you have to focus a little harder to really adjust the viewing and then it becomes normal, but I was concerned that it might break my $450 odd glasses with Crizer lens & scratch resistance. Not advisable on frameless glasses. Certainly on non frameless. I still recommend it but I haven't used it too often. Only reason I bought it, was to avoid the white light from rear.
1418843
You did the right thing with the D40. See the Lew Rockwell site.I have had mine for several months, and the more I learn about it,the better I like it.I recommend you buy the 55-200 VR lens to go with it.Unbelievable.
886539
The FX body that you can afford is the best to work with this FX lens. LolBut if you want a brand new body, the D600 is the cheapest body you can get, although the image quality is great, I don't really like how the auto focus points are all bunched up in the middle (because it uses the same auto focusing system as the D7000, A crop sensored camera) the other hand, if you're willing to get used, you can get a D700 for pretty cheap (just make sure the actuation count isn't too high). The auto focusing system isn't as good but is spread out throughout the viewable area, which I like. I personally use this lens with my D700 and strap my 85 1.4 to my D800. Good combo for me. :) The FX body that you can afford is the best to work with this FX lens. LolBut if you want a brand new body, the D600 is the cheapest body you can get, although the image quality is great, I don't really like how the auto focus points are all bunched up in the middle (because it uses the same auto focusing system as the D7000, A crop sensored camera) the other hand, if you're willing to get used, you can get a D700 for pretty cheap (just make sure the actuation count isn't too high). The auto focusing system isn't as good but is spread out throughout the viewable area, which I like. I... » Read More The FX body that you can afford is the best to work with this FX lens. LolBut if you want a brand new body, the D600 is the cheapest body you can get, although the image quality is great, I don't really like how the auto focus points are all bunched up in the middle (because it uses the same auto focusing system as the D7000, A crop sensored camera) the other hand, if you're willing to get used, you can get a D700 for pretty cheap (just make sure the actuation count isn't too high). The auto focusing system isn't as good but is spread out throughout the viewable area, which I like. I personally use this lens with my D700 and strap my 85 1.4 to my D800. Good combo for me. :) « Show Less
724505
Hey Barbara, I would definitely try one a little sturdier. I have this one now on a lighter Nikon (D7000) and primarily use a smaller lens (18-105) and I think it is about at capacity and maybe a little under-qualified. Just one man's opinion but I think something more robust would suit your very nice set up better.
567353
I have the Sony. (Took 3 thousand photos and video on an international trip). It is mostly fine, but there are 2 complaints with which I agree on the message boards. 1. Blue purple tint and glare from the lens coating in bright sunlight. 2. In general, not perfectly sharp pictures usually. (I have 5 year old Kodak 5mp that is often more sharp). The good...amazing motion stabilization. 'Able to take photos in almost any light condition without the flash!! I also have some good photos from moving vehicles. Very compact and no protruding lens or lens motor. Quick startup. HD movie is ok also. Acceptable battery life. FYI. There are assorted complaints about the Canons also. I have now read enough not to expect perfect photos from ANY point and shoot, but like you, I hate to drag around that Nikon. (You might try one of the new cameras with a bit larger sensor, like 4 3rds).
667420
The only thing I'm not high on in your Costco package is the 55-300mm. I'm selling mine because it's just not up to standards. I've heard good things about the 18-55 and, of course, the 5200. Check out the Amazon package of JUST the 18-55 and the camera body for 749, then think about something like the 70-200 or the 80-400 - both excellent pieces of glass. Good hunting!
2041776
It is all about quality. The L glass will deliver you a very well controled CA, good quality in the edges and a wonderful color retention. The 50mm f/1.4 is good and if you dont require the state of the art you will be good with that.