nikonians

Even though we ARE Nikon lovers,we are NOT affiliated with Nikon Corp. in any way.


Sign up Login
Home Forums Articles Galleries News Workshops Shop Recommended
members
All members Wiki Contests Vouchers Apps Newsletter THE NIKONIAN™ Magazines Podcasts Fundraising
JHOLE

US
3 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author
JHOLE Registered since 01st Jun 2010
Wed 14-Jul-10 12:53 PM

I've had a d5000 for a year now, just long enough to get a good feel for the basics.( mostly shoot S and A at this point - started on full auto)

I've been using the 18-55 and 55-200 kit lenses.

I shoot my kids soccer and football (sideline to sideline) - and a bit of wildlife (live on Great Lakes, so mostly shore shots ).

I have come to realise that I need more "reach" as I progress. There are more and more shots that I am pulling off, but they're just too far away to even crop and zoom....

I started looking around for "more" lens. I'm leaning towards the Sigma 50-500 because I feel it will cover the close sidelines and also have enough distance to get the far sidelines, or offshore interests that I can't get any closer to...

Then I had another thought that I haven't seen..

What about a nikon 18-200 and a 2X tele converter - effectively giving me a 36-400, a faster lens, and a better all round lens w/o the tele..?...

Will this even work on my d5000..?..

???

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

jrp

San Pedro Garza García, MX
36675 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#1. "RE: Newbie lens confusion" | In response to Reply # 0

jrp Administrator JRP is one of the co-founders, has in-depth knowledge in various areas. Awarded for his contributions for the Resources Charter Member
Wed 14-Jul-10 03:20 PM

The D5000 works with all of its features only with AF-S lenses

The AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED, both the non VR and the VR II go up to f/5.6 at 200mm; however once you put on a 2.0X TC, it becomes a 400mm but f/11

You will only be able to get shots of moving subjects only under very bright light and/or at high ISO

This is one of the reasons there are relatively few wildlife and sports photographers. To do good long shots you need a fast lens unless your subject is static and can use a tripod

The "Bigma" is a 50-500mm f/4.5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM, where HSM is about equivalent to AF-S, but it is not "fast"

You may get good shots with the 300mm f/4 AF-S Nikkor in the meantime.

Have a great time :-)
JRP (Founder & Administrator. Mainly at the north-eastern Mexican desert) Gallery, Brief Love Story
Please join the Silver, Gold and Platinum members who help this happen; upgrade.
Check our workshops at the Nikonians Academy and the Nikonians Photo Pro Shop

blw

Richmond, US
27447 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to send message via AOL IM

#2. "RE: Newbie lens confusion" | In response to Reply # 0

blw Moderator Awarded for his high level of expertise in various areas Nikonian since 18th Jun 2004
Wed 14-Jul-10 03:23 PM | edited Wed 14-Jul-10 03:27 PM by blw

> I'm leaning towards the Sigma 50-500 because I feel it will cover the close sidelines and also have enough distance to get the far sidelines, or offshore interests that I can't get any closer to...

It's an excellent choice, although I think there are now better ones. The older 50-500 HSM (known as the "Bigma") has been discontinued, and replaced with a 50-500 HSM OS - with optical stabilization. Unfortunately the price went up considerably, from ~$1000 to ~$1600. Sigma also have a 150-500 HSM OS, at around $1000, and that seems like it would be the best choice now. These, along with the Tamron 200-500, are the usual recommendations for those seeking a lot of focal length at less-than-insane prices. They're all f/6.3 lenses at 500mm, but they do work very well. As you can guess, they don't work as well as the big Sigma and Nikkor primes (Sigma 500/f4.5, 800/f5.6 or Nikon 400/f2.8, 500/f4 or 600/f4) but they don't cost $4,500-$11,000, either.

I have one of the older non-OS Bigmas. Most of the birds in my gallery were taken with it. Also, most of the 400-500mm shots in the baseball section of the gallery were shot with the Bigma, too.

> What about a nikon 18-200 and a 2X tele converter - effectively giving me a 36-400, a faster lens

No, it doesn't give you a faster lens. The 18-200VR is f/5.6 at any focal length for which a TC is interesting, and adding a 2x TC makes it into a 36-400mm f/11 lens. That's right: the 2x applies not only to the focal length, but also to the aperture! In addition to the fact that TCs aren't designed to work optimally with wide-range zooms, you just won't get either the focus or image quality out of such a combination. The 18-200VR is already only so-so at 200mm anyway, and adding a 2x TC to magnify everything - including the faults - is not a recipe for success.

A 2x TC pretty much needs an f/2.8 or maybe f/4 lens to work properly, and even then you'll want to check carefully into how well any particular combination works together. The 70-200/f2.8 AFS VR-I doesn't work all that well with the TC-20E, although that same TC works quite well on the 400/f2.8.

> Will this even work on my d5000..?

The 18-200VR + 2x TC won't even work reasonably well on a D3s, and I'd honestly put it in the "hopeless" category.

If you're asking about the 50-500/150-500 etc, yes they do work very nicely on the D5000.

_____
Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member

My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!

JHOLE

US
3 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#3. "RE: Newbie lens confusion" | In response to Reply # 2

JHOLE Registered since 01st Jun 2010
Wed 14-Jul-10 10:23 PM

Thanks guys, I forgot or was missing the fact of the apereture to change with the tele. You guys are right, I don't want that.


Ok, looks like the bigma is the way to go. (I really hate to be crowded on the short side by going with the 150-500..)

Sooo, how important do you feel the new OS is?

I can get a (what seems to be) pretty good condition, used, non-OS unit for $800 - $900 - or go brandy new for $1700...

How cool is the OS?

Dealbreaker, nice to have, must have, cute but not really needed...?...

My hands are pretty steady FWIW. Trying to learn to upload while I'm here.

Thanks guys..

Click on image to view larger version


Attachment #1, (jpg file)

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

MEMcD

US
28679 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#4. "RE: Newbie lens confusion" | In response to Reply # 3

MEMcD Moderator In depth knowledge in various areas Nikonian since 24th Dec 2007
Wed 14-Jul-10 11:10 PM

Hi Jeff,

Welcome to Nikonians!

>Thanks guys, I forgot or was missing the fact of the
>apereture to change with the tele. You guys are right, I don't
>want that.

Both the Sigma 50-500mm and the 150-500mm are variable aperture zoom lenses. Therefore the largest Aperture (Smallest f/#) will vary between f/4.5 to f/6.3 on the 50-500mm and f/5 to f/6.3 on the 150-500mm. To get a constant Aperture zoom, the only option anywhere close to 500mm is the Nikkor 200-400mm f/4 priced at about $7000.00.

>Ok, looks like the bigma is the way to go. (I really hate to
>be crowded on the short side by going with the 150-500..)
>
>Sooo, how important do you feel the new OS is?

If you plan on shooting hand held, OS is well worth the extra cost.
Consider the Rule of Thumb Minimum Shutter Speed to prevent blur to to camera shake for a DX body:
Minimum shutter speed = 1/ 1.5 X focal length of the lens.
Minimum shutter speed = 1/ 1.5 X 500mm
Minimum shutter speed = 1/750th sec.
Since you are limited to an Aperture of f/6.3, you will need reasonably bright ambient lighting conditions to be able to shoot at 1/750th sec. or faster. The Optical Stabilization should have no problem with a shutter speed of 1/250th sec. that you will need to freeze the motion of your subject (Soccer, Football, ect...).
4 stops of OS should allow you to shoot as slow as 1/45th sec. or so when shooting static subjects in low light situations.

>I can get a (what seems to be) pretty good condition, used,
>non-OS unit for $800 - $900 - or go brandy new for $1700...
>
>How cool is the OS?
>
>Dealbreaker, nice to have, must have, cute but not really
>needed...?...

See above.
I would recommend getting a lens with OS.

Good Luck and Enjoy your Nikons!

Best Regards,
Marty

JHOLE

US
3 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#5. "RE: Newbie lens confusion" | In response to Reply # 4

JHOLE Registered since 01st Jun 2010
Wed 14-Jul-10 11:55 PM

Thanks again Marty.

You seem to be a pretty knowledgable guy and quite helpful, as all the senior members here, I appreciate that.

I'm sure I'll go bigma now...just tryin' to figure out how it will end up OS, or no OS - vs. cash.





I have a business and family to tend to. I had never taken a picture in my life until I showed up with a camera and two lenses last year and told my wife "look what followed me home"...

It's been a fun year trying to learn. I'm not ready to throw big money at it - yet. I'd rather spend smaller amounts ,wasted in the learning, and follow it up with experience, even if I duplicate.

You guys have a great resource here, and it is appreciated.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

G