So I bought IT

[creativeamanda]

and I'm wondering what to do with my other lens.

I bought the Nikkor 18-200mm VRII lens yesterday. I had the 18-55mm kit lens and the 50-200mm non-VR lens and I started looking at another lens.

What I ultimately wanted was a good, all-around lens that I did not have to exchange on my camera (a D60)very often. It's bulky (quite heavy, but manageable), but I was looking for the most bang for my buck. When I bought the 50-200mm lens, I didn't really know what I was getting and it shows--I have no pictures taken in lower light with this lens that look like I'm not shaing like a leaf!

So what do I do with this other lens? Within the next year, I'm thinking of upgrading to a D5000 body, so I'm wondering if keeping the 55-200mm lens is good to keep around for the D60 or if I should just sell it towards the purchase of a 35mm lens.

ETA--I do want to keep my kit lens, as it is lighter in weight and when I am taking landscape pictures, it's nice to have to walk around with because of that lighter weight. (IE--if I'm at the beach just planning on doing sunsets, it's nice to have as that's just one place I don't want to be weighted down)

 

[creativeamanda]

Just wanted to add: I'm thinking of perhaps buying this lens:

Tokina 35mm f/2.8 AT-X PRO DX Macro Lens

http://www.amazon.com/Tokina-Macro-...8?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1267884112&sr=8-8

 

[Gdad]

Just wanted to add: I'm thinking of perhaps buying this lens:

Tokina 35mm f/2.8 AT-X PRO DX Macro Lens

http://www.amazon.com/Tokina-Macro-...8?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1267884112&sr=8-8

Why are you choosing the Tokina over the Nikon 35mm f/1.8? The Tokina is $120 more expensive and will not even auto-focus on your D60.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/606792-USA/Nikon_2183_AF_S_Nikkor_35mm_f_1_8G.html

 

[NateNLogansDad]

Why are you choosing the Tokina over the Nikon 35mm f/1.8? The Tokina is $120 more expensive and will not even auto-focus on your D60.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/606792-USA/Nikon_2183_AF_S_Nikkor_35mm_f_1_8G.html

I thought the same thing....

 

[creativeamanda]

I don't know--The guy at the camera store suggested it?

 

[wenrob]

The 18-200 really isn't going to give you much better low light pics then the 50-200 will, their aperture range is the same. You'll gain a little with the VR but not much.

The 35 f/1.8 will give you much more light then the Tokina will. I would suggest that you read up on aperture and understand what it means before making any further lens purchases.

 

[GvilleDisneyDad]

I also got the 18-200 VRII about a week ago. I sold my 55-200 VR on craigslist in about 2 hours. I have not put the 18-55 up for sale yet but probably will.

 

[creativeamanda]

wenrob--so you're saying I made a bad purchase? I thought it was bad for a camera to continually change lenses--that it can cause dust to get into the shutters? I wanted a lens that I could walk around with 80% of the time. Is that not what I bought?

Even in daylight photos, if I did not have the 55-200mm lens on with the camera on a tripod, the pictures looked really grainy. It's not real easy to always have a tripod with you when you are at MK ropedrop, lol.

If I can't trust my local camera store, who told me the Tokina was a good purchase, where should I go?

 

[NateNLogansDad]

wenrob--so you're saying I made a bad purchase? I thought it was bad for a camera to continually change lenses--that it can cause dust to get into the shutters? I wanted a lens that I could walk around with 80% of the time. Is that not what I bought?

Even in daylight photos, if I did not have the 55-200mm lens on with the camera on a tripod, the pictures looked really grainy. It's not real easy to always have a tripod with you when you are at MK ropedrop, lol.

If I can't trust my local camera store, who told me the Tokina was a good purchase, where should I go?

I'd say these boards are a good place to go to.

I'm hoping to be able to go 18-200 eventually. I wouldn't say it's a bad purchase at all. Swapping lenses is a real pain while out walking around. Every lens has a purpose, just make sure it fits your needs before you buy it.

 

[wenrob]

wenrob--so you're saying I made a bad purchase? I thought it was bad for a camera to continually change lenses--that it can cause dust to get into the shutters? I wanted a lens that I could walk around with 80% of the time. Is that not what I bought?

Even in daylight photos, if I did not have the 55-200mm lens on with the camera on a tripod, the pictures looked really grainy. It's not real easy to always have a tripod with you when you are at MK ropedrop, lol.

If I can't trust my local camera store, who told me the Tokina was a good purchase, where should I go?

No, no, no, I'm just saying when it comes to low light the aps are the same therefore the light gathering capability is going to be the same. The difference is going to be minimal, the VR will buy you a stop or two but it's not going to give you more light. Only fast glass can do that which is why I suggest reading up on aperture and understanding it.

A question: Are you shooting in auto everything? Your pics are probably grainy because the camera is jacking up the ISO to make up for the lack of light. That's going to happen with either lens. The 18-200 is not a bad lens but it's not going to make up much for where the 50-200 is lacking. If you want better pics you need to understand aperture, ISO and shutter speed and how they work together. Once you get that you can make decisions based on that knowledge and your photos will improve 100%.

As for the camera shop guy, if he recommended a lens that won't auto focus on your camera, has a smaller ap and costs more then one that will do all those things, yeah, you can't trust him he's just trying to make a sale. As to what to do, read, read, read and ask questions. The photogs here have endless patience and are more then willing to help any way they can.

 

[creativeamanda]

LOL, I don't use autofocus anymore. DH does, but I like having a bit of control. Maybe I'm using the wrong settings?

I try to keep ISO at 100 during daylight hours.

The big difference between grainy and non grainy for me was using a tripod.

As far as the camera salesman goes, I think he really wanted me to go ahead and purchase the Tokina Friday. I felt like I had spent enough on the 18-200mm for then. I'm glad I came here first.

ETA: I can't tell you what my aperture is at usually during daylight--I've been going by a guidebook. I try to keep shutter speed during daylight around 1/600 for everyday snapshots. Maybe there is where I'm going wrong?

 

[Gdad]

I think the 18-200VRI is very nice- my daugter's camera kit is that lens on a D40 plus the Nikon 35mm f1.8. It is a great light-weight combo which I borrow from her sometimes. The new 18-200VRII I'm sure has better VR than the 50-200 does- and as you mentioned you have the convenience of the full range in one lens. I would not say that changing lenses is bad for the camera- but yes when you remove a lens there is always a chance dust can get in- something could get dropped on the ground- the shot you wanted to take could be gone by the time you make the swap- etc. etc. Lots of reasons to go for the lens- I would not call it a bad purchase at all.

All that being said I don't think you should be getting blurry pictures in broad daylight with the 50-200mm lens either. That could be caused by a number of things with your technique or your camera settings. If you post some examples with EXIF or tell us what kind of settings you shoot with then maybe we can help?

As for your local camera store I have no idea- salespeople in general are not necessarily always as well informed as they should be. I'll leave it at that and assume he was not just trying to unload something on you that has been collecting dust on his shelf for the last year or two. But the bottom line is the Nikon is cheaper, faster, will auto-focus on your camera, and (going out on a limb now- but not much) probably much better optically- especially at f/2.8. There is really no reason in the world to choose the Tokina that I can think of.

 

[creativeamanda]

Adding--I'll dig up a couple of examples, but they are on my external hard drive at home and I'm at work right now. Thought I'd have some in photobucket, but I'm not that far in my trip reports.

 

[wenrob]

LOL, I don't use autofocus anymore. DH does, but I like having a bit of control. Maybe I'm using the wrong settings?

I try to keep ISO at 100 during daylight hours.

The big difference between grainy and non grainy for me was using a tripod.

As far as the camera salesman goes, I think he really wanted me to go ahead and purchase the Tokina Friday. I felt like I had spent enough on the 18-200mm for then. I'm glad I came here first.

You can have plenty of control using auto focus using your focus points. IMHO there's no reason to manual focus unless you have no other choice.
eta: Maybe you meant Auto Mode and not Auto Focus?

As Jeff said maybe post some pics with EXIF and maybe we can help as far as settings. ISO 100 is not always best even in daylight it's what gets you the best exposure. If 400, 600, 800 are going to get a photo that is exposed properly versus one that is under exposed the grain is going to much less. If the difference was made by a tripod then it sounds as if your shutter speed may be too slow.

I have nothing against the 18-200 it was my primary lens for quite some time. I was just pointing out that as far as gathering light it's not much different then 50-200.