• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

I think I've settled on my 3...for now

C

CptObvious

Platinum Member
After not owning an SLR for a few years, I bought a D3100 in March with the 18-55, 55-200VR and 35mm 1.8. In retrospect I probably would've been fine with this setup (all for under $1000 too...can't beat that) but I caught the upgrade bug and wasted quite a bit of money buying, trying and selling lenses. However, I think I finally have a setup that I'm satisfied with, a Siggy, Tammy and Nikki:

Wide: Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6
Normal: Tamron 17-50 non-VC
Telephoto: Nikon 55-200mm VR

The telephoto was definitely the hardest to decide on. I had the Nikon 70-300 VR and Tamron 70-300 VC but the weight and size difference made me reluctant to pull them out, especially in front of people (the whole paparazzi vibe with the lens hood on).

Now I just need to stay away from the deals sites to avoid lens sales 🙂
 
I thought I would, but when I bought my Tamron, the 35mm never came out of the bag. It's in a better place, on some other owner's camera.
 
Yep, I opted for the non-VC for all of the above...cheaper (main reason), plus reports that it was less sharp, and I find handholding a non-stabilized lens isn't a problem around 85mm and under.
 
For me it's:

Ultra-wide: Tokina 11-16 f/2.8
Standard zoom: Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS
Telephoto: Canon 55-250mm (nifty two-fifty)

I don't really shoot telephoto, so the cheap Canon zoom fits for me.
 
CptObvious said:
After not owning an SLR for a few years, I bought a D3100 in March with the 18-55, 55-200VR and 35mm 1.8. In retrospect I probably would've been fine with this setup (all for under $1000 too...can't beat that) but I caught the upgrade bug and wasted quite a bit of money buying, trying and selling lenses. However, I think I finally have a setup that I'm satisfied with, a Siggy, Tammy and Nikki:

Wide: Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6
Normal: Tamron 17-50 non-VC
Telephoto: Nikon 55-200mm VR

The telephoto was definitely the hardest to decide on. I had the Nikon 70-300 VR and Tamron 70-300 VC but the weight and size difference made me reluctant to pull them out, especially in front of people (the whole paparazzi vibe with the lens hood on).

Now I just need to stay away from the deals sites to avoid lens sales 🙂
Click to expand...

How would you compare, from your personal experience, the Tam 17-50 and the Nikon 18-55 kit lens? Also, would you mind putting up some samples taken with the Tamron?

JR
 
JohnnyRebel said:
How would you compare, from your personal experience, the Tam 17-50 and the Nikon 18-55 kit lens? Also, would you mind putting up some samples taken with the Tamron?

JR
Click to expand...
IQ-wise they are similar. A lot of people say the Tamron is sharper but I can't tell much of a difference. The kit lens is very good in that aspect. The Tamron maybe has a bit more contrast.

The real benefit of the Tamron is the f/2.8. I took this shot in a dark indoor environment at f/2.8 last weekend:

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/863/57688427367a7e9b6afcb.jpg/

It's not a great shot and has been resized several times, but if I took the same shot with the kit lens, it would be more challenging with the higher noise.
 
What about the bokeh on the Tamron? Ken "knows more than God" Rockwell says that it is terrible, at least on the VC version.

JR
 
Bokeh is pretty good on mine but nothing to write home about. It's a little short and a little slow (even at 50mm f/2.8) to throw backgrounds completely out of focus. I had the Samyang 85mm f/1.4 and that could turn anything in the background into blur...people, trees, etc. If I ever pick up a 4th lens, I might have to re-buy that Samyang.
 
CptObvious said:
After not owning an SLR for a few years, I bought a D3100 in March with the 18-55, 55-200VR and 35mm 1.8. In retrospect I probably would've been fine with this setup (all for under $1000 too...can't beat that) but I caught the upgrade bug and wasted quite a bit of money buying, trying and selling lenses. However, I think I finally have a setup that I'm satisfied with, a Siggy, Tammy and Nikki:

Wide: Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6
Normal: Tamron 17-50 non-VC
Telephoto: Nikon 55-200mm VR

The telephoto was definitely the hardest to decide on. I had the Nikon 70-300 VR and Tamron 70-300 VC but the weight and size difference made me reluctant to pull them out, especially in front of people (the whole paparazzi vibe with the lens hood on).

Now I just need to stay away from the deals sites to avoid lens sales 🙂
Click to expand...

I'm going to give the Tamron 17-50 non-VC a test drive. Just ordered one from Adorama, and will try it out on a D200 I just picked up for almost nothing.

JR
 
Hope it works out for you. I just sent mine in to Tamron to adjust the zoom ring (too tight and 'gritty', but optically fine).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top