Camera Labs

I am a bit confused about which lens to buy for my Nikon D7000!

Should I buy the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM or just buy the Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR ?

Also should I get the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG APO Macro HSM II or get the Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF ED VR just because it is a Nikon?


Help.



I opened this thread also in the Third party lens part of the forum.

Sigma both times.

The Nikons have nothing going for them other than well... they are Nikons.

Having an f2.8 IMHO is crucial, especially if this is your only lens.

It lets you keep the ISO down in low light (by up to 2 stops compared with the 16-85 or 70-300) and it will let you blow the background out of focus with so much more ease.

I wouldnt consider the 16-85 at all to be honest, Id rather have an 18-200mm.

On that note and 18-200mm and 35mm f1.8 for low light is IMHO the ultimate combination for amateur DX.

_________________
Nikon D5000 and D300 with 12-24mm, 35mm f1.8, 50mm f1.4, 60mm f2.8 Macro, 18-200mm, 17-55mm f2.8 (all Nikon)

Hi 12345,

Given you want to be anonymous do I also guess from your name that you want to be numerous as well.

Seriously, welcome to the forum but I have deleted your duplicate post. Please take a moment to glance through our forum rules to see why.

Bob.

_________________
OM-D E-M5 + ED 12-50mm, H-PS14042E, H-F007014E, L-RS014150E, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm 1:1.8.
Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.

Depands on what you want the lenses for. If it's low light and moving subjects, f2.8 will be useful (2/3 stop advantage at the wide end, more as you go to telephoto).

I take more static subjects in low light, so the 16-85 does well for me, its extra reach at the telephoto end adding versatility. I'm very happy with the lens, but it's for what I do.

The 35/1.8 is excellent in low light, but, of course no image stabilisation and shallow depth of field.

_________________
HCC
Nikon DSLRs, film cameras from Leica to Linhof

I went through a similar though process with the the canon 15-85 and the canon 17-55 is usm .
I think the extra 2mm at the wide end is useful, if you want a general purpose lens the 16-85 is hard to beat.

If low light is important to you I would just get the 35mm 1.8 G DX its a lot brighter than 2.8. Its a great little lens. I have used it on a borrowed D90. Then there is the 50 1.4

I feel the 17-55 is too specific, unless its bokeh you are chasing. With the high iso abilty of the D7000, the extra light from the 2.8 isn`t going to make that much difference.


With the bigger zooms, what range to you need, what do you want to use them for, where do you plan on using them?
Comparing a 70-200 2.8 vs a 70-300 4.5-5.6 isn`t really possible

_________________
Canon Powershot S95, Canon 7D, 15-85, Canon 85 1.8 USM, Sigma 30 1.4, 50mm 1.8, Canon 100 2.8L IS Macro, Canon 70-300L IS USM+Kenko 1.4 Pro 300DGX, Canon 430EX II and RS 4 Classic