Lens question (Page 2): The lens's you choose certainly aren't going to render the world "as you see it"--the human eye is pretty wide angle--but if little bits and pieces are what you...

Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum

Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰

Lens question

Page <prev 2 of 2

Aug 13, 2015 11:55:10 #

stan0301 Loc: Colorado

The lens's you choose certainly aren't going to render the world "as you see it"--the human eye is pretty wide angle--but if little bits and pieces are what you enjoy you should do fine--I don't think I have picked up the 55-300 in a year or more.
Stan

Aug 13, 2015 11:57:05 #

Don Fischer Loc: Antelope, Ore

Ctrclckws wrote:

Just gave myself a lightweight kit with a refurbished d5300, 18-55mm and 55-300mm lenses. Total price <750 from Adorama.

The 55-300mm refurbished price was $200, so it's a nice compliment to the 18-55mm.

That probably work's for a lot of people but I like the low and high side to over lap. If you have on the 18-55 and need a bit more, you have to change the lens. And if you have on the 55-300 and need a little less, again you have to change the lens. The 18-55 doesn't do a thing for me and I have the 55-300. If I were doing it over, for about the same money as the 55-300, I'd go with either an 18-270 or an 18-300. Now I do have a couple that I do like. The 18-140 and the 55-300. Having that overlap is really nice! I have to say too, all those things knowledgeable people see in photo's, I don't see. I take photo's for myself and for me, composition is more important than those thing's I can't see!

i should also mention, i have the 18-105 and teamed with the 55-300 it worked very well. I just wanted the 18-140 because!

Aug 13, 2015 12:54:05 #

SwedeUSA2

jerryc41 wrote:

CreativeLive has an excellent video on using the D5100 - D5300.

http://www.creativelive.com/courses/nikon-d5100-d5200-dslr-fast-start

The OP bought, and asked questions about, a D3100

Aug 13, 2015 13:13:15 #

Ctrclckws

Don Fischer wrote:

That probably work's for a lot of people but I lik... (show quote)

Overlap in range is good, I have the 18-140 if needed. Only let Adorama send me the 18-55 because the body only price was only $10 less.

Aug 13, 2015 15:07:26 #

Don Fischer Loc: Antelope, Ore

If it was $10 different when I got my 5000 I'd have taken it for sure. The 18-140 wasn't around then only the 18-105 and that 18-55 was the kit lens.

Aug 13, 2015 15:51:21 #

ruswhite Loc: Sun Cit, AZ

You may want to check out a 18-300mm lens since it will do what the other two lenses together can do. I know I'm not the only one who has that type of lens on their camera. I have some other lenses, but the lens that lives on my D300 is an 18-270mm (no 18-300 when I bought it). The other lenses visit whenever I need them. I usually know that I'm going to take some photos, but when I'm walking around and something catches my eye, it may be big and close or small and far, so what I tend to carry is my D300 with 18-270, a spare battery and a polarizing filter. Of course none of this applies if you are only concerned with one particular aspect such as Landscapes or close-ups or whatever.

Aug 13, 2015 18:41:34 #

houdel Loc: Chase, Michigan USA

DXOMark rates the 18-55mm and 55-300mm lenses about equal in overall performance and sharpness so other than focal length the 55-300mm should be about as "good" as your 18-55mm.

Aug 13, 2015 21:29:32 #

Erik_H Loc: Denham Springs, Louisiana

erpatterson78 wrote:

Hi everyone. I bought a Nikon 3100 starter kit like 5 years ago. I've been stuck with the 18-55mm lens it came with. I'm thinking of getting this lens. I know it has to be better than what I currently have. Anyone have this lens or advice as to why or why not I should not get it?

Thanks for looking and adding any input.

55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR DX AF-S ED Zoom-Nikkor Lens

I also bought a D3100 as my first DSLR several years ago, and the first lens I added was the 55-300. It's been a very good lens and although I shoot mostly full frame now, I still use it with my D7000 fairly often and my son really likes it on my old D3100.

Aug 13, 2015 23:06:03 #

adamsg Loc: Chubbuck, ID

I agree, totally, about the utility and quality of the 55-300 lens. On my D3100, it gives me VERY sharp pictures (mostly landscape and wildlife), and a lot of versatility. I have used it to take close ups - in shots where I can carefully control depth of field, and it is great for cropping landscapes.

My 18-55 kit lens that came with the body is rather useful, but as time goes by in my digital learning curve, I find myself using the 55-300 more each outing.

I think one of my problems has been going from film (Nikon F with a 1.4, 50mm Nikkor lens and a so-so Vivitar 135. The greater range of options is just more obvious with the 55-300 on my 3100. I still have a lot to learn.

Aug 14, 2015 00:34:34 #

JD750 Loc: SoCal

erpatterson78 wrote:

I like taking pictures outdoors. I'm usually hiki... (show quote)

Thank you for the reply.

Looking at the web link, I remembered that I saw those pics the other day when looking at the Photos section. :) Based on those pics, It would seem to me that a macro lens, rather than a telephoto, might suit your needs better.

I don't think you want to just throw money at this. Unless you have money to burn, it is not trivial to buy a new lens. I think you will ultimately be happier with your purchase if you become a more informed buyer. You like the hobby. Might I suggest you spend a bit of time learning about lenses? There are many good articles, print books, e-books, u-tube videos and on-line tutorials on the subject (pick the format you like). Use your favorite search engine, to find the material.

Aug 14, 2015 13:02:47 #

erpatterson78 Loc: Ohio

Thanks every one for your feed back and your preferences. I'm thinking of renting the lens. I never really even thought of that as an option; however it makes total sense. JD750, I have thought about the macro lens but when I'm hiking I take scenery shots as well as wildlife and insects. I've seen some of the 18-270 but if memory serves me those are out of my price range. I would have to rent one of those lens as well, but I don't think weight is an issue; however I have no real life experience using them. I do recall i've always been out in about and remembering how i wish i had more of a zoom for a subject that is further away. But i like seeing everyone's opinions on here. helps me question my motive and lens purchase :)

Aug 15, 2015 15:30:23 #

JD750 Loc: SoCal

erpatterson78 wrote:

Thanks every one for your feed back and your prefe... (show quote)

You must do what works for you, but please understand a Macro lens it not limited to close up photography. They can be used for other purposes too, like portraiture and landscape (depending on the lens). This is why I suggested doing a bit more research before committing hard earned dollars. Renting is a great way to learn if a lens is suitable for what you want.

Aug 19, 2015 13:57:47 #

erpatterson78 Loc: Ohio

houdel wrote:

DXOMark rates the 18-55mm and 55-300mm lenses about equal in overall performance and sharpness so other than focal length the 55-300mm should be about as "good" as your 18-55mm.

Houdel,

I'm using the 55-300 lens now and I agree with that.

Aug 19, 2015 14:01:34 #

erpatterson78 Loc: Ohio

SO i'm using the 55-300 lens this week. Friday i go on a nice day hike with some friends, so i can really see if this is something I would end up using a lot. This past weekend I did find myself swapping out lenses (18-55mm & 55-300mm). I did look at the 18-300mm and that's so far out of my price range it hurt to just look :)

Here is one with the 55-300mm lens on my Nikon D3100

zoom: 300mm
ISO 400
F-Stop f/5.6
apeture 5

(Download)

Page <prev 2 of 2

If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.

Main Photography Discussion

Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections

UglyHedgehog.com - Forum