[Buffetfan]

Originally Posted by KameshR

The D7000 with 18-105 and whole lot of kit was being sold for $996 during thanksgiving but it has now gone up by $200. From the current price, this appears to be a good but hope the 55-200 is with VR.

Yes the 55-200 is with VR . Got the camera couple of days ago and feel like a kid playing with a toy!

[Schoudhury]

Guys

I'm planning to pick up a lens for my D3100.
Can any one tell me which one is better a 55-300 or 70-300 lens.
Also how much does the internal focusing matters when we get a lens.
The 55-300 I'm getting it for about 18k and the 70-300 IF-ED lens for about 30k.
Can any one please let me the difference between these lenses and which one to go for, please advise.
Cheers

[Aroy]

Originally Posted by Schoudhury

Guys

I'm planning to pick up a lens for my D3100.
Can any one tell me which one is better a 55-300 or 70-300 lens.
Also how much does the internal focusing matters when we get a lens.
The 55-300 I'm getting it for about 18k and the 70-300 IF-ED lens for about 30k.
Can any one please let me the difference between these lenses and which one to go for, please advise.
Cheers

. 55-300 is DX format lense
. 70-300m is FX format lense

in general the lesser the zoom range the better the lense optics. In the larger range zooms the photos are a bit soft at one end (and at times at both).

I would go for the 70-300.

[fuel_addict]

Originally Posted by aZa

Guys 650D or 60D ? Both are costing the same.

The 650D's USP is the continuous autofocus for video shooting and the touch screen. The second IMO is hardly useful. The first feature would work only if you buy the STM lenses which will significantly push the equipment cost much higher.

The 60D has better build, higher max shutter speed, higher shooting fps and better weather resistance. It will feel much better in the hand with professional grade lenses. I recently bought the 15-85 EF-S lens for the 60D and the lens and body balance each other quite well. The 650D feels like any other Rebel series body. Well, it is one.

[M35]

Originally Posted by Schoudhury

Guys

I'm planning to pick up a lens for my D3100.
Can any one tell me which one is better a 55-300 or 70-300 lens.
Also how much does the internal focusing matters when we get a lens.
The 55-300 I'm getting it for about 18k and the 70-300 IF-ED lens for about 30k.
Can any one please let me the difference between these lenses and which one to go for, please advise.
Cheers

I assume you to have the 18-55mm already. I have D3100 with 18-55mm and 55-300mm [both being AF and VR]kits. Both work really well with the former being little bit sharper than the latter.

[rameshnanda]

Guys, is anyone using Nikkor 28-300 f/3.5-5.6 lens? I am contemplating to buy this lens.

[alpha1]

POSTED ON THE EVIL THREAD

I came across one awesome website which gives you a guideline to estimate the best prime lens suitable for the occasion:
http://www.fredparker.com/vislize.htm

You just require arms and fingers to determine the right lens!
Incidentally, this will also help in choosing which lens to buy ...

[Rajvir Bains]

Originally Posted by fuel_addict

The 650D's USP is the continuous autofocus for video shooting and the touch screen. The second IMO is hardly useful. The first feature would work only if you buy the STM lenses which will significantly push the equipment cost much higher.

The 60D has better build, higher max shutter speed, higher shooting fps and better weather resistance. It will feel much better in the hand with professional grade lenses. I recently bought the 15-85 EF-S lens for the 60D and the lens and body balance each other quite well. The 650D feels like any other Rebel series body. Well, it is one.

Hello fuel_addict,
How would you rate the Canon 15-85mm lens ? Is it really worth the price ? Hows the performance in low light ?
I have Canon 550d with 18-55mm and 50mm 1.8 prime lens. I want to upgrade to 15-85mm lens.
If you have used 50mm 1.8 lens, can you give me an idea how 15-85 mm performs image quality wise when compared with 50mm 1.8 lens.

Thank You in Advance.

[SDP]

Originally Posted by rameshnanda

Guys, is anyone using Nikkor 28-300 f/3.5-5.6 lens? I am contemplating to buy this lens.

Ramesh, please check Aroy's useful post 3 posts above yours.

Generally speaking getting a broad zoom-range on a single lens is not a good idea.

[W.A.G.7]

Originally Posted by W.A.G.7

I was reading a few reviews and they all seem to say that the lens produces soft images (not sharp) at 500mm end; though sharpness can be improved upto some extent by stepping down the aperture from F8 to F11. Does anyone here on the forum have this lens on either Nikon or Canon mount? Can someone share your experiences with this lens if you have any?

Well, I did use this lens at 500mm end in Bharatpur and found that in bright sunlight the images are very good sharp if you use F7.1-F11. If it's used at below F7.1; 500mm end and in foggy/low light conditions, the images do turn out soft. I would write a travelogue about the trip and post a small review of this lens soon.

[vsathyap]

Originally Posted by Schoudhury

Guys

I'm planning to pick up a lens for my D3100.
Can any one tell me which one is better a 55-300 or 70-300 lens.
Also how much does the internal focusing matters when we get a lens.
The 55-300 I'm getting it for about 18k and the 70-300 IF-ED lens for about 30k.
Can any one please let me the difference between these lenses and which one to go for, please advise.
Cheers

I personally own the 70-300 and I can say that its a fantastic lens. The VR is simply amazing and does its job really well. I'm not too sure about the 55-300 - I was also thinking of getting the same, but decided to go for the 70-300 as the build quality is much better and it feels a lot more "solid" in your hands. Believe me, if the glass is expensive - it REALLY does mean its got stuff in it that WORTH the price. You may not really notice the difference on your computer screen when viewing images at "fit to screen" but it does matter when you go 100%.

In any case, as always lenses dont do all that well at the far end of the zoom range and it holds in this case too. However, the 70-300 is the "most" decent glass offering you the range of 70-300 in that price bracket.

[Schoudhury]

Originally Posted by vsathyap

I personally own the 70-300 and I can say that its a fantastic lens. The VR is simply amazing and does its job really well. I'm not too sure about the 55-300 - I was also thinking of getting the same, but decided to go for the 70-300 as the build quality is much better and it feels a lot more "solid" in your hands. Believe me, if the glass is expensive - it REALLY does mean its got stuff in it that WORTH the price. You may not really notice the difference on your computer screen when viewing images at "fit to screen" but it does matter when you go 100%.

In any case, as always lenses dont do all that well at the far end of the zoom range and it holds in this case too. However, the 70-300 is the "most" decent glass offering you the range of 70-300 in that price bracket.

Originally Posted by M35

I assume you to have the 18-55mm already. I have D3100 with 18-55mm and 55-300mm [both being AF and VR]kits. Both work really well with the former being little bit sharper than the latter.

Originally Posted by Aroy

. 55-300 is DX format lense
. 70-300m is FX format lense

in general the lesser the zoom range the better the lense optics. In the larger range zooms the photos are a bit soft at one end (and at times at both).

I would go for the 70-300.

Thanks Guys .
I think i will go for 70-300 only .
Any suggestion where i can get the best price.
There are some used lenses in Ebay(USA ), not sure if its worth picking it up from there .

Cheers

[nileshch]

Originally Posted by fuel_addict

The 650D's USP is the continuous autofocus for video shooting and the touch screen. The second IMO is hardly useful. The first feature would work only if you buy the STM lenses which will significantly push the equipment cost much higher.

The 60D has better build, higher max shutter speed, higher shooting fps and better weather resistance. It will feel much better in the hand with professional grade lenses. I recently bought the 15-85 EF-S lens for the 60D and the lens and body balance each other quite well. The 650D feels like any other Rebel series body. Well, it is one.

+1 to that. Recently I was in the market for a new body to replace my aging 20D. I too was in a similar fix. Using the 20D for seven years without a single issue (including use in light rain!) made me go for the one with the tougher build (weather sealed) and faster specs finally. The other advantage over 650D is the easier controls (less button pressing with the control wheel) and better feel to hold.

Originally Posted by Rajvir Bains

Hello fuel_addict,
How would you rate the Canon 15-85mm lens ? Is it really worth the price ? Hows the performance in low light ?
I have Canon 550d with 18-55mm and 50mm 1.8 prime lens. I want to upgrade to 15-85mm lens.
If you have used 50mm 1.8 lens, can you give me an idea how 15-85 mm performs image quality wise when compared with 50mm 1.8 lens.

Thank You in Advance.

The 50 mm, being a very simple lens, offers amazing sharpness and bokeh at its focal length for the price. However, you are really comparing apples and oranges here. 15-85mm offers convenience (wide-angle to portrait) that 50mm will not, and the 50mm will offer a different perspective that the 15-85mm will not! Both are exclusive to each other.

If you are comparing with your existing 18-55mm kit lens, 15-85 will offer much better sharpness, plus it is an IS lens.

[fuel_addict]

Originally Posted by Rajvir Bains

Hello fuel_addict,
How would you rate the Canon 15-85mm lens ? Is it really worth the price ? Hows the performance in low light ?
I have Canon 550d with 18-55mm and 50mm 1.8 prime lens. I want to upgrade to 15-85mm lens.
If you have used 50mm 1.8 lens, can you give me an idea how 15-85 mm performs image quality wise when compared with 50mm 1.8 lens.

Thank You in Advance.

The 15-85 lens is very good optically. There is visible distortion at the wide end but this can be easily corrected. The lens is very well built, has very good image sharpness and the USM helps in achieving quick and silent autofocus. The lens is considerably heavier than the 18-55 kit lens. The lens will outweigh the 550D body.

Low light performance of the 15-85 will be the same as the 18-55 since they both have the same f/3.5 at the wide end. The15-85 will focus faster due to the USM. The wide end as well as telephoto end of the 15-85 make it a very good walk around lens. It is not the ideal lens for stopping fast moving subjects in low light but you can always bump up the ISO speed to compensate.

I have the 50mm f/1.8 prime lens too. The 50mm has it specific advantages and is certainly a better low light performer. But the fixed focal length and the slow AF are its sore points. Optically, it is comparable to the 15-85 in the f/3.5-8.0 range being a prime lens.

The 15-85 is expensive. Canon increased prices of all its lenses in Sept. which makes its worse. I purchased it off a brand new 7D kit and got a significant discount.

Originally Posted by nileshch

+1 to that. Recently I was in the market for a new body to replace my aging 20D. I too was in a similar fix. Using the 20D for seven years without a single issue (including use in light rain!) made me go for the one with the tougher build (weather sealed) and faster specs finally.

The 50 mm, being a very simple lens, offers amazing sharpness and bokeh at its focal length for the price. However, you are really comparing apples and oranges here. 15-85mm offers convenience (wide-angle to portrait) that 50mm will not, and the 50mm will offer a different perspective that the 15-85mm will not! Both are exclusive to each other.

If you are comparing with your existing 18-55mm kit lens, 15-85 will offer much better sharpness, plus it is an IS lens.

+1 to that. What battery life are you getting on your 60D? I have been getting around 500-600 odd shots (10% pictures with flash, LCD brightness set at level 3, seldom video recording). This is much lower than the Canon claimed life of 1600 shots without flash and 1100 with flash.

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by rameshnanda

Guys, is anyone using Nikkor 28-300 f/3.5-5.6 lens? I am contemplating to buy this lens.

I had the lens in early 2011. Use it for 3 months and sold it off. I forked out extra and purchased the professional caliber and fast Nikkor 24-70 F/2.8. This is my favorite lens and is always on my camera(s).

The 28-300 has good contrast, colour and sharpness from 28-200. It is soft after 200mm and not nearly acceptable at 300. Distortion is present but still acceptable at the wide and tele ends but this can be corrected in PP.

It's good as a single walk around lens but you can't expect too much from an 11x zoom. Depends completely on what kind of photography you intend to use it for. No low light or fast action photography. Works well for general 'touristy' kind of stuff.

Recommended with reservations. If you have the budget for the 28-300 I'd say up your budget/save more and get the 24-70. You won't get the range but you will get a lens that you will keep for a long time.