nikon lens: 18-105mm VR or 18-200mm VR to pair with a d90 and a complete noob

[LordSnailz]

I think I've settled on the d90 on my first dslr ... but I wasn't sure which lens would be suitable for someone new to dslr like myself.

Should I spring the extra cash for the 18-200mm or will I not be able to tell the difference between the two. I guess which would be the more versatile one if I'm mainly shooting people and some sports and prob. won't purchase another lens for another couple years?

thanks in adv!

 

[jpeyton]

A better option is a two-lens kit. Get the D90/18-105mm VR kit because that lens is a great value, and pick up a 70-300mm VR for telephoto. You'll spend around the same amount you would have on a 18-200mm VR, but with better optical performance on the long end (and you'll have an extra 100mm reach). If you want to shoot sports, you'll find that you need 300mm more often than not.

 

[Muadib]

Hey jpeyton, what's your opinion on the Tamron 28-80mm Zoom Lens & the Tamron 70-300mm Di LD Macro Zoom Lens? How do they stand up to the Nikon lens you recommend? Should I spend the extra cash & get the 2 Nikons?

 

[jpeyton]

Tamron makes some great lenses, but the two you mentioned are very average at best. Even two low-end Nikon lenses like this and this would be better options if you're on a budget. If you want to spend a little more, get the 18-55mm VR and 55-200mm VR. The 70-300mm VR is a great lens, but it's quite a bit more expensive than any of the other lenses.

 

[Muadib]

Ok, I'll stick with the first 2 nikons then. Thanks!

 

[OulOat]

Originally posted by: LordSnailz
I think I've settled on the d90 on my first dslr ... but I wasn't sure which lens would be suitable for someone new to dslr like myself.

Should I spring the extra cash for the 18-200mm or will I not be able to tell the difference between the two. I guess which would be the more versatile one if I'm mainly shooting people and some sports and prob. won't purchase another lens for another couple years?

thanks in adv!

The 18-200 would be more versatile than the two lens of equal zoom just for the simple reason that you don't have to switch lens. Much less hassle and hurry, plus you don't have to worry about sensor dust (a huge pain in the butt during print processing). Sure, you trade some image quality for flexibility, but the quality is nothing to laugh about. If you are not going to pixel peep, that lens is more than enough for a casual to enthusiast photographer.

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: OulOat

Originally posted by: LordSnailz
I think I've settled on the d90 on my first dslr ... but I wasn't sure which lens would be suitable for someone new to dslr like myself.

Should I spring the extra cash for the 18-200mm or will I not be able to tell the difference between the two. I guess which would be the more versatile one if I'm mainly shooting people and some sports and prob. won't purchase another lens for another couple years?

thanks in adv!

The 18-200 would be more versatile than the two lens of equal zoom just for the simple reason that you don't have to switch lens. Much less hassle and hurry, plus you don't have to worry about sensor dust (a huge pain in the butt during print processing). Sure, you trade some image quality for flexibility, but the quality is nothing to laugh about. If you are not going to pixel peep, that lens is more than enough for a casual to enthusiast photographer.

Agreed, for you there is no point in fretting about what additional optical quality you will get from using more than one lens. Why jack with carrying more that one lens when the 18-200 will be a better lens than you are a photographer?

Unless you want to go out to 450 mm. You are already out to 300mm with the 18-200.