Some Advice

[LeeMac13]

Hi everbody,

I finally made the jump to SLR today and got myself a Nikon D5000 the camera came with a 18-55mm VR Lens. Im looking at getting myself a larger lense as the current lens isnt reallly the best for taking wildlife/zoo photos to say the least.

Can anybody recomend a lens/lenses that I should think about getting hold of? Also is there a difference between buying a Sigma or a nikon lense as i have heard the argument for both with some people saying Sigma lenses are fine and are just as good as Nikon lenses but I have also been told that its best to pay the extra and go for a Nikon lense.

Any help that you can provide will be greatly appreciated.

 

[macca]

i would suggest getting a zoom lens that is at least 300mm. i bought the tamron 70-300mm when i first got my slr, which usually sells for a very reasonable price compared to the nikon equivalent. i've also got the sigma 150-500mm, which i love, but it is heavy to carry around a zoo all day.

 

[LeeMac13]

This is the lense i was thinking of getting NEW SIGMA 70-300mm F4-5.6 DG MACRO LENS-NIKON-70-300 mm | eBay UK but i few people have said to me that I would be better off spending the extra money and getting a Nikon lense. Is that correct?

 

[gentle lemur]

I have used, and still use, both Sigma and Nikon lenses. The top of the line Nikkors are better than the cheaper ones or the Sigmas - you do get what you pay for. However the difference in quality is much smaller than the difference in price. You might find better value in a second-hand Nikkor, but check that it will allow to use all the features on your D5000.

Alan

 

[Arizona Docent]

I know there is an issue with Sigma lenses on certain Canon cameras, but I am not sure if the same thing ever happens with Nikon. I have never read about it with Nikon, but as a Canon user I don't generally read Nikon threads anyway. The issue is that Sigma "reverse engineers" their lenses instead of buying the design license from Canon (and presumably Nikon). So while a new Sigma lens works with all current cameras in the mount it is designed for, there are cases where the lens will not work with future camera bodies. This has happened MANY times in the past with newly introduced Canon bodies - again, I am not sure if it happens with Nikon but it is a potential danger. If you plan on sticking with your new Nikon for many years and not upgrading, then it may not be an issue. But be aware that there is a chance your Sigma lens will not work down the line if you buy a new camera body.

As already stated, with lenses you really do get what you pay for. More expensive lenses are almost always sharper and better built. 300mm is the standard for zoo photography and will help you blur out fences in many cases (just be sure to switch the lens from autofocus to manual focus). A large aperture will also help. Most 300mm zooms go to f/5.6 as their largest aperture. But if you can afford the fixed 300mm f/4, that will help a lot. (Or if you are independently wealthy, go for a 300mm f/2.8!).

I work at a pro photo lab and lead photo workshops and classes, so feel free to PM me with any technical questions.

 

[SMR]

The D5000 doesn't have a full-frame sensor, so any lens you mount on it will have an effective 1.5× focal length. In other words, a 300mm zoom will be 450mm in practice.

Obtaining foreground blur is a combination of focal length and aperture so balance the two.

I'm going to take a slightly different view on lens choices. Putting a hugely expensive lens on a 12.3MP body is going to be largely overkill, unless you intend to keep the lens long after the body and/or require improved environmental seals. As Alan so rightly says, lenses suffer from diminishing returns far more than camera bodies, for example.

I've never used a Nikon body so have never used a Nikkor lens, but if Canon lenses are anything to go by, there are some fantastic budget price choices that in my experience, can sometimes be sharper than L Series offerings. Obviously primes are always sharper than zooms, but leaving that aside, Canon's dirt-cheap 50mm prime is fantastically sharp, and in my opinion, the "best" lens I own is their non-L Series 100mm macro.

I have used three Sigma lenses and hated all of them. The first was a wide angle and it was horribly soft, the exchange was no better (I got a refund) and then a few years later I tried a medium length zoom and the chromatic aberration was terrible.