by "Pixel" (Improbcat)
Published 02/09/2017 at 09:18
by "Pixel" (Improbcat)
Published 02/09/2017 at 09:18
No Tags
STARS: 0
I picked my camera up off the coffee table last night to shoot some pics of the pieces of the bike I’m vinyl wrapping, and the strap caught under the lip of the table, yanking it out of my hand to fall lens-first on the floor.
it doesn’t look damaged, but it has a decidedly crunch feeling when manually zooming & focusing. Auto-focus just makes a quiet, sad noise and does nothing.
Used replacements can be had for under $100 on ebay, so it isn’t disastrous, just annoying.
"Ash78, voting early and often" (ash78)
02/09/2017 at 09:37, STARS: 2
That ’ s just God telling you how he feels about the 18 - 55 kit lens, IMHO. Keep an eye out for a Sigma or Tamron 17 - 50 with f/2.8 around $300 on sale (Adorama has the latter right now). They ’ re twice as heavy and bulky, but they take MUCH better shots under all conditions. Or for the high - $ 100s range, the 35mm prime f/1.8. Small, easy, amazing shots (if you don ’ t mind losing a zoom).
"vicali" (vicali)
02/09/2017 at 09:44, STARS: 2
Wouldn’t replace it with another kit. Go with the 18-200 vr. Won’t be much more.
"SteveLehto" (stevelehto)
02/09/2017 at 09:51, STARS: 0
I love the Nikon VR lenses. I’ve had a few off-brand lenses over the years but never liked them as much. Considering where I’ve lugged mine, I’m surprised I’ve never smashed a lens. I have broken one or two UV filters - which means they were doing their job (giving themselves up to save the big lens).
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
02/09/2017 at 10:00, STARS: 0
I have the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, and it is very, very good for the money.
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
02/09/2017 at 10:01, STARS: 0
Just seconding what Ash78 said. Look for the Tamron or Sigma 17-50 f/2.8. It’s a great lens for the money (I have one, and use it all the time). Time to step up from the kit lens.
"Ash78, voting early and often" (ash78)
02/09/2017 at 10:03, STARS: 0
Definitely, I’ve got the Sigma and it’s my “95% lens” (or Every Day Carry in weapon terms, lol). It transformed our outdated DSLR into a much better machine instantly. And less than half the price of the competing Nikkor/etc.
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
02/09/2017 at 10:10, STARS: 0
I also have the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8. It’s damn near as good as the Canon, and significantly cheaper (though certainly not cheap).
"Thomas Donohue" (tomonomics)
02/09/2017 at 10:17, STARS: 0
I smashed my 18-55 in a rental car in Ireland a few years back. Fell off the back seat and hit the floor after a sudden stop, as I forgot to put it in my backpack. The plastic mount was 75% cracked off. But, it still took pretty good pictures here and there for another few days, albeit with some large spots from the plastic bits bouncing around on the sensor! For a kit lens, it was super light and took pretty good pics.
At the time, I found a refurb 18-105 and saved my pennies for a 10-24, which is one of my all-time favorite Nikon lenses (still have it as part of a pared down DX setup, even though I went full frame.)
+1 on the Tamron 17-55, although it is a bit chunky depending on what body you have. It fit well on my D7000.
"Textured Soy Protein" (texturedsoyprotein)
02/09/2017 at 10:17, STARS: 0
Super zooms like that are rarely an upgrade in optical quality, only in convenience. Meh.
"Textured Soy Protein" (texturedsoyprotein)
02/09/2017 at 10:22, STARS: 0
I had the Tamron 17-50/2.8 a few years ago back when I was in a Pentax DSLR phase. My copy of the lens was tricky to get the focus dialed in, I was always fiddling with the camera’s AF adjustment menu to get it right. That probably is the fault of the camera in addition to the lens.
I’ve always been more of a prime lens fan, especially since I switched to m4/3.
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
02/09/2017 at 10:24, STARS: 0
I haven’t had any issues. You may have gotten a bum lens. Who knows? I’ve never shot with primes. I probably should, but for what I do most, zooms are most efficient.
"Textured Soy Protein" (texturedsoyprotein)
02/09/2017 at 10:40, STARS: 0
It’s certainly possible. The AF on Pentax bodies was really finicky with different lenses. That Tamron 17-50 wasn’t the only one I had to mess with the AF fine adjustment menu on the body.
Shooting primes really isn’t that hard, just takes a little adjustment to how you think about framing shots. With m4/3 I have the Panasonic 14/2.5 which is tiny 25/1.7 which is still nice and small. I can carry them and my Olympus E-PL5 body in a little Olympus mini messenger bag that came as a freebie when I bought the camera. I have a bigger (relatively speaking) Domke F-5XC bag to carry all my gear, but the 2 primes and body in the mini bag is very small. I mostly use the 25 and occasionally switch to the 14 if I need wider shots.
A good majority of my shooting is with family candids in low light so I like having the fast AF, unobtrusive camera, and fastest possible aperture. It’s small enough with the primes that it’s just like, “oh he’s messing with his camera,” and not like, “oh here’s the family paparazzi,” if I stuck an SLR with a zoom up to my face.
(m4/3 crop factor is 2x)
"Trevor Slattery, ACTOR" (anacostiabikecompany)
02/09/2017 at 11:41, STARS: 0
Forget that 18-55 like the others said. The Tamrom has better f/stop at 2.8.
But for real this sucker will change your camera.
Always under $200.
"gmctavish needs more space" (gmctavish)
02/09/2017 at 13:34, STARS: 0
This is good to know
"Ash78, voting early and often" (ash78)
02/09/2017 at 13:40, STARS: 1
I’m the “Camry Driver” of photography. Just give me the short, easy, no-work-required option :D
"gmctavish needs more space" (gmctavish)
02/09/2017 at 13:58, STARS: 0
I’ve just been reading up on them. The Sigma is more expensive, but it looks like it’s optical stabilization works better with Nikons than the Tamron’s vibration control. Some are suggesting the non-VC Tamron, but I dont shoot with a tripod so that’s probably not ideal for me.
"Ash78, voting early and often" (ash78)
02/09/2017 at 14:14, STARS: 1
From what I
’
ve seen, both are about $400 retail, but $300 on sale (I got my Sigma 6 months ago from BuyDig, who is an authorized retailer). I don
’
t believe mine has VC, but I always shot my old 18
-
55 Nikon without VR, as well. YMMV, but I only notice handheld blur beyond about 100mm (my 55
-
200mm is a VR). I consider them excessive on everyday carry lenses.