Just picked up a new lens? Post it here...

[ion-man]

Hi fellow shooters, as a relative newbie to the DSLR world I am very excited everytime I buy or even reviewing new lenses to buy. Since I assume most readers of this forum share similar excitement whenever there is an addition to their lens arsenal, I'd like you to post here.

 

To start, I am still beaming from my acquisition early last week, of the 35mm f/1.8 Nikkor after a substantial waiting period and less than the price in the link.

I also picked up the new Tamron 18-270mm with the PZD Drive this weekend so not alot of real world experience with it as yet. This quote about sums up a key selling point for me:

"Tamron lowers size and weight and ups the ante on what may be the ideal travel photography lens"

Traded my 18-55mm and 55-200mm kit lenses in the process. This cuts down on what I travel with. If anyone has any real world experience on this new all-in-one lens, please chime in :D.

[awboater]

I would be interested in your thoughts on the 18-270mm, so please post a review after you have used it awhile. I have never been a fan of super-range zooms (personal preference), but I got to admit that its nice to have a lightweight lens for travel.

 

Speaking of new lenses...

 

I just ordered a new Nikkor AF 80-200 f2.8 today; It should be here tomorrow. I am also thinking of getting a gym membership so I can toughen up to be able to carry it around.

 

Have heard this lens may be discontinued sometime in the future, but you know what they say about rumors. The Nikkor AF-S 70-200 2.8 VRII was just not in the budget (twice as expensive as the lens I bought).

 

I did consider a used 80-200, but I have been watching eBay, the going price for one in good condition is 75% of a new one - for a lens that could be 10yrs old. I just could not justify buying an as-is lens for that kind of money, sight unseen - and having no ability to return it. To me, that justifies a new lens, if the resale is that good.

 

One thing is for sure, lenses have jumped in price since the earthquake in Japan. True, many lenses are now made in Taiwan, China, and other Asian areas, so there may be some sympathy price gouging, but the 80-200 I believe is still made in Japan.

 

I am keeping my older Nikkor AF 70-300 lens as it is a lot lighter, so it will probably continue to be my cruising telephoto. I doubt I will be lugging my new 80-200 on many cruises. I bought it primarily for sports photography (rather than anything on a cruise), so VR was not that important. True the AF-S focusing on the 70-200 2.8 is faster than the 80-200 AF, but again, it's twice as expensive. This lens is considered a poor man's 70-200 2.8.

 

I am using it on a D90 for now, so it will autofocus OK. Although I think the D90 class bodies may have focus motors that may not be as powerful as the pro bodies, so the focusing might not be as fast as on a more advanced body. But I am an amateur, so my budget dictates my progression is to buy a little hardware at a time, and when I make the next body upgrade in a few years, the lenses will be there.

 

Since I cannot afford to shell out $15K all at once, I have believed that you should try to buy one item a year for your "collection". I have been doing this off-and-on since the mid-90s (but not every year) with a Nikon film camera, and then with my first digital (D70).

 

The film camera body sits in a box in the closet, and I gave my D70 to my youngest son when I bought the D90 five years later. I still have the 70-300 lens that I originally bought for the film camera, so it is definitely true that you will own the lenses longer than the bodies - so I believe this is where you put your money.

 

So I figure I am on track in another 3 or 4 years for the next body. But in the mean time, I have lately been buying a lens a year - as the budget allows.

[Rex008]

Funnily enough I also received the same Tamron lens just yesterday (Canon version, to pair with Canon 550D - Rebel T2i in the US, I think). Took a few shots yesterday evening, exploring the range. Very very impressed. I'd previously been using a combination of Canon 18-135 IS and 75-300 IS. I think the new lens matches them for image quality quite easily. Got some pin sharp images at full zoom handheld at 1/60, which shows how good the VC is. You can see it cutting in when you half press the shutter, just locks on. Superb. I'd read some mixed reviews, some people don't seem to get on with the VC, but the copy I have seems absolutely brilliant.

 

Only negative (which frankly isn't at all surprising) is that at f6.3 at the long end, it sometimes has problems focussing in low light. I was taking shots of my 7yo boy in our living room, unlit apart from windows, at dusk yesterday, and it wasn't locking on. Managed at shorter zoom, just not at full. Manual focus was fine though, although the focus ring does less than 1/4 of a turn from min to infinity, which makes it slightly tricky. Auto focus is impressively fast when it does lock though.

 

I'm also very impressed that it's shorter and lighter than the 18-135 I had. Even with the hood on, it's only just slightly longer, and on-camera it fits in both my big and small bags in the same space as with the original lens without having to keep taking the hood off.

 

Internal debate now is what to go for next. I'll be selling the pair I have. I also have a 50mm 1.8 prime, which is a lovely fast portrait lens, that I'll be keeping. With the spare cash I'm debating between a really long zoom (Sigma 170-500 for instance) or a fast wide angle (prime or low range zoom, 12-24 or 10-20). Getting internal flashless shots of museums/buildings on our upcoming Baltic cruise (the main reason for buying the Tamron superzoom) probably dictates a fast wide-angle, but an enormo-zoom appeals to me for some reason :). The Tamron is f3.5 at 18mm, so it's as quick as some I've been looking at, at that point. And with the VC it may well be good enough. But I'm going to have a play and test it out in those circumstances.

 

My kit budget is restricted. Would love some nice Canon L glass, but think it will be a while until I can step up to those.

[trophy_23]

A word of caution as a fellow Canon shooter. The world of L lenses is a dangerous one, once you have one you always want more!! :). Which is why I can't post any new lens purchase as I am still saving for the next one. :p

[zackiedawg]

I've had many years of experience with the forerunner of the 18-270mm by Tamron - which is their 18-250mm lens. It really stepped up the game on superzoom lenses, taking an average 18-200mm that had mixed reviews and creating an extremely capable, small, light lens throughout the range. Though I'm an avid lens collector, and have over 20 lenses between my two kits for various specialty purposes, the 18-250mm lens is always the default/travel/storage/kit lens on my DSLR and I've used this lens in probably every shooting scenario it is possible to use it for: sports, action, night, high ISO, indoor, architecture, wildlife, landscape, macro/closeup, scenic, travel, long exposure, HDR, portrait, candid...you name it, I've shot it with this lens.

 

I can say that I've got primes at various given focal lengths that can outperform the 18-250mm at each comparative focal, but the astounding versatility this lens offers, and the relative lack of compromises it forces that so many always fear when it comes to superzoom lenses, make it a real winner.

 

Everything I've seen on the 18-270mm sounds like it is a nice evolutionary improvement.

[chipmaster]

Tamron's love their value have a few; 28-75 2.8 BIM, 28-75 2.8 sans BIM, 17-35 2.8-4, 28-300 VC ( FX equavalenet of the DX superszoom ).

 

 

My newest lens, fat boy, scored on CL for a little over $3K :o Picture of my kitty giving it some love ( I'd swear there is catnip in that case ), and fatboy with the other ones. Second picture of the collection, can you guess which is fat boy :D

 

Hi fellow shooters, as a relative newbie to the DSLR world I am very excited everytime I buy or even reviewing new lenses to buy. Since I assume most readers of this forum share similar excitement whenever there is an addition to their lens arsenal, I'd like you to post here.

 

To start, I am still beaming from my acquisition early last week, of the 35mm f/1.8 Nikkor after a substantial waiting period and less than the price in the link.

I also picked up the new Tamron 18-270mm with the PZD Drive this weekend so not alot of real world experience with it as yet. This quote about sums up a key selling point for me:

"Tamron lowers size and weight and ups the ante on what may be the ideal travel photography lens"

Traded my 18-55mm and 55-200mm kit lenses in the process. This cuts down on what I travel with. If anyone has any real world experience on this new all-in-one lens, please chime in :D.

[c230k]

I use Nikon D7000 and carry the 28-300mm. The beauty of this lens is that it not only covers a great range for most shooting situations (28-300mm), but it's also a full-frame FX lens. Using a full-frame lens on D7000 (a DX camer) effectively have a 42-450 lens. This lens is small compared to other 400mm and with VRII can get away without a tripod. Did have the Bigma lens just to much with to carry. Just a thought.

[Rex008]

Came into a bit of unexpected cash, so I've just ordered a new Sigma lens for my Canon 550D.

 

 

Hmm, actually, not this one :). May be a bit heavy to take on a cruise. No, I've ordered this one:

 

 

Sigma AF 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 DC HSM. UWA zoom, gets extremely good reviews. Really looking forward to having a play with it. Even though it's not particularly fast, I'm hoping to use it for some of the grand building interiors on my upcoming Baltic cruise. Reports are that it performs well despite the max f-stop. And could get some interesting perspective shots of the ship itself.

 

What's more, there's a bit of money left over, so if this works out, I'm probably in the market for a long zoom as well - looking at the Sigma 150-500 OS at the mo. Seems very good value for what you get. Anyone with any opinions on this lens?

[bobmacliberty]

My wife gave me a Canon 70-200 f/2.8 II for Christmas. I'm still in love (with both the wife and the lens). I contemplated the f/4 version to save both size and money but I shoot a lot of my daughter's dance competitions indoors and need every bit of light that I can get.

[ion-man]

^^^

Bob, you are a lucky guy, both for an understanding wife and for getting that lens.

[Cnd_Cruiser]

I just purchased the Nikon 24-70 2.8 and I must say Wow! This is my piece of pro glass and the difference is amazing. It is super sharp, fast to focus and produces amazing pictures.

[wilfros]

I don't believe in doing anything half way. I just purchased a new Canon Rebel T3 DSLR and then bought a 3D lens.

 

Here is the camera set up:

 

 

And this is what it produces:

 

 

3D still or video photos. The presentation here is known as cross-eye stereoscopic photos. For viewing instructions or to see cruise photos in 3D visit my blog (link in signature).

 

Oh yea!!!! The camera did come with it's own 18-55mm lens with image stabilization but, I haven't used it yet. Just picked everything up yesterday so today was FUN day.

[pierces]

I don't believe in doing anything half way. I just purchased a new Canon Rebel T3 DSLR and then bought a 3D lens.

 

Here is the camera set up:

 

 

And this is what it produces:

 

 

3D still or video photos. The presentation here is known as cross-eye stereoscopic photos. For viewing instructions or to see cruise photos in 3D visit my blog (link in signature).

 

Oh yea!!!! The camera did come with it's own 18-55mm lens with image stabilization but, I haven't used it yet. Just picked everything up yesterday so today was FUN day.

 

Pretty cool effect, but I would need a few dozen Advil to get through the eyestrain from even a moderately long cruise album! :D

 

Dave

[wilfros]

Pretty cool effect, but I would need a few dozen Advil to get through the eyestrain from even a moderately long cruise album! :D

 

Dave

Yea Dave you are not the only one to say that. But, you can at least see the effect, many can't so for that I am happy.

 

As for the headache, you are using eye muscles not normally engaged. The more you view the photos the easier and more comfortable it becomes. I can look at these for hours now and when I started I was like you, only able to view for a few minutes at a time.

 

Anyway, thanks for the post.

[pierces]

Yea Dave you are not the only one to say that. But, you can at least see the effect, many can't so for that I am happy.

 

As for the headache, you are using eye muscles not normally engaged. The more you view the photos the easier and more comfortable it becomes. I can look at these for hours now and when I started I was like you, only able to view for a few minutes at a time.

 

Anyway, thanks for the post.

 

Did you ever see the Steve Martin movie "The Jerk"?

 

The long term effects need to be considered....;)

 

Dave