Home
Just picked up a new Nikon 3100 kit, I believe it came with a 28-55mm. I realize this is a price point lens and is made to pacify the masses, therefore I want a more versatile lens which offers better versatility and picture quality. I was thinking 55-200 something mm in the price range of around 400ish (maybe a bit more). The lens will primarily be used for landscape and family outings.
Instead of the 55-200, I might suggest the Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5 - 5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR. While it is a FF lens, you get to use the sweet center of the lens with the crop body. It is AF-S so it will work with the D3100. I am using the 70-300 with my D90 and like it especially from 70-200.

Another option would be to sell the 18-55 if you are not happy with it, and get the 16-85DX which should give better IQ and cover most of the family and landscape duties (aside from sports). In reviewing my landscapes, I noticed that 28mm was a well-used average.

Are you looking for something more versatile to replace the 18-55, or to supplement that lens? My D90 came packaged with the 18-105 kit and it's a very versatile lens. My copy is darn sharp too. If you plan on keeping the 18-55, I would also suggest the 70-300 VR. From wildlife to sports, portraits and even some landscapes - this lens will do all that. It's not the best in low-light, but great for most everything else. Those two lenses, a flash unit and some reflectors and there's not a whole lot the average non-pro wouldn't be able to cover. When dollars are involved I often switch to a 50mm or 85mm prime, and my Tokina 11-16 is just fun. But that 18-105 stays on the camera most of the time.
I would definitely look at the Tamron 70-300mm VC USD as an alternative to the Nikon version. Not that there is anything wrong with it, but you are paying about twice the price for a lens that is not any sharper than the Tamron IMO. Right now that lens has a rebate of $100 plus the MAP is about $450, by my calculations that comes to $350!!! That is an incredible lens for an incredible price. If you want the all in one option, take a look at the Tamron 18-270mm VC PZD which also has a $100 rebate. I carry that lens with me all time when I am out and about. Give Joel a call at Camera Land and see what he can do to answer a few questions for you.
Originally Posted by RedRabbit
Instead of the 55-200, I might suggest the Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5 - 5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR. While it is a FF lens, you get to use the sweet center of the lens with the crop body. It is AF-S so it will work with the D3100. I am using the 70-300 with my D90 and like it especially from 70-200.



I have the same set up as RR. Really happy with the lens.

Mid-day light, but here is a shot taken a few hours ago with that set up.

[Linked Image]
Click "Reply" to get a decent size of the pic.
Thanks for the replies fellas, nice shot of the sheep miller, I sure miss living in Mt! Great info, I'll either get the Nikon as has been suggested or the Tamron, although my preference leans towards the Nikon.
I'm looking forward to getting this rig out, I mean I'm looking forward to my wife getting it out.
I also have the D3100 with a Nikon 70-300. Took about a thousand pics last year in Kruger Park and like the set up. I'm not a real avid photo guy but took some very good shots.
Originally Posted by RedRabbit
Instead of the 55-200, I might suggest the Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5 - 5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR. While it is a FF lens, you get to use the sweet center of the lens with the crop body. It is AF-S so it will work with the D3100. I am using the 70-300 with my D90 and like it especially from 70-200.

Another option would be to sell the 18-55 if you are not happy with it, and get the 16-85DX which should give better IQ and cover most of the family and landscape duties (aside from sports). In reviewing my landscapes, I noticed that 28mm was a well-used average.




I agree with you.
© 24hourcampfire