Is this a good lens or recommend alternatives?

jonnybravo

Hi,


I'm going on safari next month and would like people's opinions on the two zoom lens below or what would other people recommend for a reasonable price. I have a Nikon D3100 with just a standard lens at the moment.


http://www.onestop-digital.com/index.php?dispatch=products.view&product_id=33276&currency=EUR

http://www.onestop-digital.com/index.php?dispatch=products.view&product_id=33542&currency=EUR


Thanks,


Jonny

DaireQuinlan

jonnybravo wrote: »

Hi,


I'm going on safari next month and would like people's opinions on the two zoom lens below or what would other people recommend for a reasonable price. I have a Nikon D3100 with just a standard lens at the moment.


http://www.onestop-digital.com/index.php?dispatch=products.view&product_id=33276&currency=EUR

http://www.onestop-digital.com/index.php?dispatch=products.view&product_id=33542&currency=EUR

Too many compromises. Get a short prime and a long prime. Switch between them as necessary.

Zillah

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

Too many compromises. Get a short prime and a long prime. Switch between them as necessary.

Swapping lenses can be an absolute headache in the field - he could end up on the back of a jeep bouncing around on a dusty track trying to keep up with a pride of lions! You might get a few better shots here and there with primes, but you might also miss a bunch of wonderful moments because you take two minutes to change focal length instead of two seconds.

There will be lots of sun out on safari, so you can keep the aperture in the middle zone and thereby compensate for a lot of the downsides of a zoom lens.

I'm not saying the primes are a bad idea, but you sound just a little too dismissive.

DaireQuinlan

Zillah wrote: »

Swapping lenses can be an absolute headache in the field - he could end up on the back of a jeep bouncing around on a dusty track trying to keep up with a pride of lions! You might get a few better shots here and there with primes, but you might also miss a bunch of wonderful moments because you take two minutes to change focal length instead of two seconds.

There will be lots of sun out on safari, so you can keep the aperture in the middle zone and thereby compensate for a lot of the downsides of a zoom lens.

I'm by no means a sharpness fanatic or anything, but I've never liked the look of those super zooms. Mushy and distorted. I have a 75->300 I rarely if ever use. I'd heartily recommend one of those big chunky f/2.8 or f/4 zooms, they seem to have things mostly under control, but it'll set you back a few extra euro. Nice long prime, get used to the focal length, and you'll probably end up getting better shots anyway once you get accustomed to what you can see through it.

Or alternatively, who says you need a long lens to go on safari :-D

Heebie

If I were going, I think I'd probably bring my 70-200mm f2.8 lens, and my 1.5x and 2.5x adapters. That way I could get to 400mm with f4 or so and if I were close enough to work with 200mm, I'd get REALLY sharp images. A Tamron or Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 isn't much more than than 18-200mm lens you're looking at, and you probably have up to 70mm already covered with your kit lens for a Nikon.
The cheaper of the 2 lenses you're looking at looks like about as poor a lens as Nikon makes (meaning, it's probably not crap, but it's probably not particularly good either.)
The more expensive lens looks pretty good, but as someone mentioned, it's a compromise. A 70-200 f2.8 is a huge cannon of a lens, heavy to carry around, but they take great photos.

poundhound

Johnnybravo, if you have the kit lens 18mm-55mm, then go for the 55mm-300mm telephoto.

I just bought one and its a great lens.

On safari, I dont think you'll be able to get too close to your subject matter to use anything less than 55mm, so you probably wont need to change lenses.

I also doubt you'll need a "fast" lens as its unlikely you'll be shooting in low light.

The 55mm-300mm obviously has a greater reach than the 18-200mm, so I think its ideal for what you need it for.

Trotter

I went on safari in Africa a few years ago and never really got any use of the 18-55 standard lens. I used my 55-200 almost all of the time. You rarely are allowed close enough to the animals to need an 18-55. I'd have that in the bag for when you stop for breaks just to get some shots of the people with you etc. One regret I have is not shooting in RAW at the time. I wasn't up to speed on it at the time but I wish I'd done that now.

Also, decide what kind of card/capacity you think you'll need.. And then triple it! There's nowhere to get spare cards on safari and you really don't want to be deleting images which may turn out to be croppable into something great when you get home. The spare cards won't go to waste.

Borderfox

A 300mm f4 would be perfect for safari, not too heavy but enough reach even if you crop

jonnybravo

Thanks everyone for all the replies. It's given me a lot to think about.


This might be a stupid question but if I go for the 55-300 rather than the 18-200 will the 55-300 allow me to take photos of objects that are further away? I was getting confused with zooms as the 18-200 says that there is a 11 times zoom compared to 5.5 for the 55-300 but my understanding is the 55-300 is still better for further away?

DaireQuinlan

jonnybravo wrote: »

Thanks everyone for all the replies. It's given me a lot to think about.


This might be a stupid question but if I go for the 55-300 rather than the 18-200 will the 55-300 allow me to take photos of objects that are further away? I was getting confused with zooms as the 18-200 says that there is a 11 times zoom compared to 5.5 for the 55-300 but my understanding is the 55-300 is still better for further away?

Yes, if by 'better' you mean things will appear larger in your shots/you'll appear to be closer if you shoot at 300mm compared to shooting at 200mm.

http://www.usa.canon.com/app/html/EFLenses101/focal_length.html

jonnybravo

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

Yes, if by 'better' you mean things will appear larger in your shots/you'll appear to be closer if you shoot at 300mm compared to shooting at 200mm.

http://www.usa.canon.com/app/html/EFLenses101/focal_length.html

Yes I meant larger! Thanks for your response!