Jul 31, 2008

I want a 70-300mm, Mum. Teehee.

At first, it was the Nikon 18-200mm, then it was the Nikon 70-300mm. Lately, I've realized an alternative to getting Nikon lenses that I cannot afford. DoH! Why didn't I think of this earlier?


Tamron 70-300mm, Sigma 70-300mm DL or Sigma 70-300mm APO.


And so the questions that come with it:
  1. Sigma's APO was an upgrade from the DL but is it really a must-have?
  2. Why is the Sigma 70-200mm more expensive than a Sigma 70-300mm?
  3. Are the lenses compatible with my D40, in the sense that 3D matrix metering, autofocus, exposure meter and electronic range finder will still work? Because it says "(Nikon F)" and my current lens is a G.

Any other information would be really nice :)

6 comments:

jassed said...

Absolutely go for nikon 18-200 VR even if it costs more than your d40 body. Forget the other off-brands. But to answer your question:

1. No. Like i said, save up for 18-200.

2. because the 70-200 has 2.8 aperture at all focal length. And any zoom lens going beyond 200mm has a lot of trade off, and except if you're regularly shooting birds on fine sunny days, there's really not much use for 300mm.

3. Tamron works for d40 while the sigma manual focus only. this is the same sigma lens that ah fong has. he says its nice, but has limited application. But the sigma website says they has a version for d40, so you have to double check.

P/S: "Nikon F" means the F mount. That's the same mount on all nikon slrs in history.

DG is sigma's term for Digital, means its for digital slrs.

G lenses are nikon's way of saying they removed the manual aperture rings on the lens.

Look for the term "with built-in-motor" in off-brands' spec sheets. These work with d40.

:)

cheahwey said...

Well yeah, 18-200mm really is better. Sigh, but so expensive.

Hopefully I can get a cheaper price in USA.

sean said...

wah gibberish

jassed said...

It sells for $679.95 new at Adorama. If you're into teles and its a must-have now, go for a nikon 55-200 vr (RM850+) loh. Its at least a decent lens and doesn't weigh much.

Yeah, lenses will burn pockets. I'm living in poverty now. Bought another lens, tokina 12-24 just a couple weeks after i got the tamron. Luckily 2nd hand lah.

cheahwey said...

Sean:
Go buy a camera! We need more camera kakis in this family! And we can talk shit about apertures, shutters and god damn ghosting in pictures. Hate it.

Jason O:
Temptations, be damned!
I will keep to myself, save that $680 and buy the lens in the USA! BAH.

Anonymous said...

Maybe I`ll be Captain Obvious, but... it's only few days to New Year last, so let's be happy!
Hoho3ho!)