Stuart1044 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2007, 90 posts, RR: 2 Posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2021 times:
Hi All,
Currently i have a Nikon D60 with the 18-55mm lens, and i am looking to save up for a longer lens. Trouble is i am not sure which to go for, i have singled out the following two:
Conoramoia From Ireland, joined Oct 2007, 498 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2009 times:
well if you think that you'll be able to get the shots you want with the 200mm then buy that,but if not you must realize that the quality in the 300mm is going to be lower and will involve more post-editing,
Iamlucky13 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 227 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1958 times:
Quoting Stuart1044 (Reply 4): I was thinking sort of that way, the VR lenses are very costly, but are obviously worth it.
I reckon i could manage with the 55-200mm lens and benefit from quality due to the VR factor
When the light is good, VR does little if anything for you. As shutter speeds start to get lower is when you'll appreciate it.
If you think you'll shooting a lot in the evening or overcast conditions, I'd take the Nikon in a heartbeat (it's sharpness is a little more consistent, but there's a few specific conditions where the Tamron beats it), but if not it's more of a toss-up. The Tamron looks to have slower AF, but if the locations you typically spot from put you a long ways from the planes, you might want the extra length.
I mainly will be spotting around Manchester EGCC, where on the 'mound' you are pretty damn close, however, when they use the other runway it is a bit difficult to get them, i think the 55-200 would be long enough. The conditions in Manchester are usually grey, however we occasioanlly get some sun
Chase From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1054 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (4 years 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1503 times:
If it helps your frame of mind any, bear in mind that the 200mm lens on a D60, with its EPS-C sized sensor, is equivalent to a 320mm lens on a full-frame camera. That's the kind of mentral trickery that, if I were in your shoes, would get me off the fence and down the camera shop
Stuart1044 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2007, 90 posts, RR: 2 Reply 8, posted (4 years 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1452 times:
I think i am going to go for the 55-200mm vr. I was having a look at th 70-300mm vr but i'm a bit short on cash at the moment. I think the 55-200 will be long enough.
Janneman From Netherlands, joined Sep 2007, 2 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (4 years 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1417 times:
If you want a good lens that is affordable buy the 120-400 from Sigma.
Last year i traded a Nikon 80-400 in for this one and it is really better in every way,and i only had the Nikon for five months.
I wished that Nikon made a lens like that.
Good luck with your search.
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2007, 90 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Oct 2007, 498 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Jun 2005, 163 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4879 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 227 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
