Lens advice

[YourFoodSherpa]

In the next few weeks, I will be taking LD trains from WAS-PGH, CHI-SFC, and SAN-SEA. I have a Nikon D3100 DSLR camera and have really only recently been learning to use the thing on the manual settings. I take OK pictures with the automatic settings, but I would like to work on taking excellent photographs. I already own the 18-55 and the 55-200 VR kit lenses that came with the camera. I am considering purchasing a 55-300 or 70-300 lens and wonder if this would be beneficial for the trips I will be taking on the Cap Limited, Cal Zephyr and Coast Starlight. In addition to train stuff, I do like taking action photos at sporting events (from the stands, mostly), so the extra zoom would be beneficial there, as well.

One caveat, I don't know that I have a ton of money to devote to this purchase, as it seems as though the newest 70-300 Nikon lens runs around $600 on Amazon. I am considering a less expensive Sigma or Tamron lens. I don't know that I am (a) smart enough or (b) a good enough picture-taker to know the difference between the $600 version and the similar Sigma lens for under $250. Still, I would like to make a decision on this reasonably soon, so that I have time to order it and ship it here and play with it for a day or two before I head out of town. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

 

[Ryan]

The 70-300 is a much better lens. You can pick up a refurb from B&H for $440:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/731073-REF/Nikon_2161B_Refurbished_AF_S_VR_Zoom_NIKKOR.html

Edit: You can also sell your 55-200 to help defray the cost and live with the "gap" from 55-70. Or sell both of your lenses and get the 18-105 and 70-300 combo.

 

[johnny.menhennet]

In the next few weeks, I will be taking LD trains from WAS-PGH, CHI-SFC, and SAN-SEA. I have a Nikon D3100 DSLR camera and have really only recently been learning to use the thing on the manual settings. I take OK pictures with the automatic settings, but I would like to work on taking excellent photographs. I already own the 18-55 and the 55-200 VR kit lenses that came with the camera. I am considering purchasing a 55-300 or 70-300 lens and wonder if this would be beneficial for the trips I will be taking on the Cap Limited, Cal Zephyr and Coast Starlight. In addition to train stuff, I do like taking action photos at sporting events (from the stands, mostly), so the extra zoom would be beneficial there, as well.

One caveat, I don't know that I have a ton of money to devote to this purchase, as it seems as though the newest 70-300 Nikon lens runs around $600 on Amazon. I am considering a less expensive Sigma or Tamron lens. I don't know that I am (a) smart enough or (b) a good enough picture-taker to know the difference between the $600 version and the similar Sigma lens for under $250. Still, I would like to make a decision on this reasonably soon, so that I have time to order it and ship it here and play with it for a day or two before I head out of town. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

I don't have anything to say about the lens, but I'm glad you took my advice and decided to leave from SAN and take the NB Starlight

 

[GG-1]

Aloha

It is hard to give you an answer but I will try.

In choosing a long range zoom, the price is ability to take pictures in low light. Unless you drop a bundle your largest available F-stop is around 4. Which becomes a penalty with high shutter speeds or low light. I have always wanted a F 2.? Cannon Lens but at 3 grand never a chance..

My recommendation, skip getting another lens altogether as you have a good range already. Those are the same ranges I have. If you want to see some of my rail pictures go here and while looking at the pictures turn on the Info button. That will show the lens/exposure used. I think for most of my train shots I use the wider lens settings.

Hope I helped

 

[IowaGirl]

You will be disappointed in the 70-300 for any indoor sports. As Engineer said - it is all about the f-stops. The lower the better, but $$$$!

I have actually had some FANTASTIC pictures using a prime lens. A prime lens is one that doesn't "zoom" - you have a fixed focal length. The downfall - instead of being able to "zoom", you have to move yourself. This isn't doable if you are in a big stadium. I take pictures in a HS gym - and that is a little easier to position myself in the spot I need to be.

I have a 50mm 1.8 Nikor lens. It does a fantastic job in low light. I have been able to take some great sports pictures in the gym with it also. Much better quality than the ones that I have taken with my 18-105mm kit lens.

I wish I had purchased the 35mm lens, and might still do that at some point.

Bigger isn't always better. To get those quality sharp photos with a zoom, you have to go to the pro line and you are talking in the thousands of dollars!

I have acceptable results with my 18-105. I often want to upgrade to a longer zoom, but want to keep the telephoto option to get the up close shots.

So many options! LOL!

I have a Nikon D90.

 

[YourFoodSherpa]

Thanks for all of the advice, folks. I really do appreciate your collective input.

 

[Ryan]

I'm always happy to help other people spend their money. Lord knows, I have enough photog friends that help me spend mine!

Let us know what you end up with and how you like it.

 

[henry kisor]

One more tip: Buy screw-in rubber lens hoods to fit the filter size of your lenses. Hold the lens hood tight against the train window. That blocks all reflections and still allows you a little room to train the lens on your subjects.

 

[jis]

After playing around much with many lenses I have generally settled on carrying the Nikkor AF-S 18mm-200mm VR DX lens (F 3.5 - 5.6) with me when I am carrying just a single lens, which is most often the case on long trips. I have found it to be the most versatile and satisfactory for my purposes which is mainly railroad, scenery and aviation photography. However, beware it is a pricey lens, and it was on the borderline of my budgetary tolerance. But I do not regret having gotten it even if it took shaking out the last penny from my piggybank back then. And it is built like a brick sh**house. Very durable and compact for its capabilities.

I also have the AF-S 70-300mm VR lens too, in addition to an assortment of non-zoom lenses, but I find that I use it much less often than my favorite lens mentioned above. Just like Ryan I am quite capable of sending myself and anyone else that cares to tag along to the poorhouse gathering devices to enhance the photographic experience.

 

[J-1 3235]

After playing around much with many lenses I have generally settled on carrying the Nikkor AF-S 18mm-200mm VR DX lens (F 3.5 - 5.6) with me when I am carrying just a single lens, which is most often the case on long trips. I have found it to be the most versatile and satisfactory for my purposes which is mainly railroad, scenery and aviation photography. However, beware it is a pricey lens, and it was on the borderline of my budgetary tolerance. But I do not regret having gotten it even if it took shaking out the last penny from my piggybank back then. And it is built like a brick sh**house. Very durable and compact for its capabilities.

I'll second Jishnu's recommendation. After asking his opinion at the LA Gathering, I saved my pennies and bought the exact same lens. I have been very happy with it; the very few disappointing photos I've taken have been do to photographer ineptness hboy:

Mike

 

[GG-1]

After playing around much with many lenses I have generally settled on carrying the Nikkor AF-S 18mm-200mm VR DX lens (F 3.5 - 5.6) with me when I am carrying just a single lens, which is most often the case on long trips. I have found it to be the most versatile and satisfactory for my purposes which is mainly railroad, scenery and aviation photography. However, beware it is a pricey lens, and it was on the borderline of my budgetary tolerance. But I do not regret having gotten it even if it took shaking out the last penny from my piggybank back then. And it is built like a brick sh**house. Very durable and compact for its capabilities.

I'll second Jishnu's recommendation. After asking his opinion at the LA Gathering, I saved my pennies and bought the exact same lens. I have been very happy with it; the very few disappointing photos I've taken have been do to photographer ineptness hboy:

Mike

Aloha

I never admit to taking bad pictures, the delete key is worn out though. :help: :giggle:

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Anybody interested in a single owner Canon EF-S 17-85 IS USM EOS?

List is something like $800 but I'll happily take $400.

Or $700 all-in if you want my Canon RTX/350D/KDN body to go with it.

I'd be happy to photograph it for you but UPS somehow "lost" all three lenses I bought to go with my new camera.

It's such a tease to have a brand new camera but no lenses to actually use with it.

 

[Ryan]

Ready to tell us what the replacement is? Must be changing systems, so ill guess you cashed in on the killer D600 deal that just cropped up (no pun intended).

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Ready to tell us what the replacement is? Must be changing systems, so ill guess you cashed in on the killer D600 deal that just cropped up (no pun intended).

Nothing quite that fancy or expensive. My primary curiosity today revolves around learning video, which my RTX is entirely incapable of handling. So I finally picked up Panasonic's tiny little GH2, which is part of the micro four thirds system of lenses and adapters. Not long ago this was still a $1,000 camera body, despite its tiny size, but soon after the GH3 came out the GH2 came down in price. Amazon's $500 GH2 body along with stackable discounts on compatible lenses finally sealed the deal. It's nowhere near professional grade, but supposedly it can create some good video once you learn how to use it properly. Even though it's nothing special I'm still excited to give it a try. I just need one single lens to show up so I can finally get started!

 

[Ryan]

Nice, good luck with that!