6 replies to this topic

[BonOlgirl]

I have a question for the experts. I'm looking at several types of D610 bundles. Some have lenses such as 25-70 or 25-300. My question is, do the long ranges lenses suffer in any way over the short??

[nbanjogal]

My understanding is that you do lose some sharpness in the long range, but that's a pretty vague understanding. Have you ever checked the lens reviews over at DxO Mark? They pair every lens you can think of with every camera, and then they test them on things like sharpness, vignetting, distortion, chromatic aberration, etc. You can select lenses to compare side by side, so perhaps information like that would help you make a choice…as well as considering what you want to shoot, of course. The 25-300 would sure be versatile.

 

Here's the link to DxO's lens ratings:

 

Lenses Database - DXOMARK

 

Their ratings have helped me feel much better about choosing the Tamron 70-200 over the Nikkor...

[BonOlgirl]

Thanks so much! I will check it out.

[TBonz]

Speaking VERY genericly, a zoom with less range (18-55) is an easier lens to design and build well than the longer the range (18-300) super zooms.  Obviously there is much more that goes into it than that, but basically, there are compromises to every lens option.  Nicole's suggestion is excellent...you could also try to rent to see how each works for you!

 

Simple example:  I was shooting photos at a lacrosse tournament using a 300 f/2.8 prime.  A Dad told me he didn't think there was any benefit to the big lens that I had when his 18-300 DX f/3.5-5.6 also went to 300 and he could shoot wider too if he wanted to.  Technically, he was correct but I guarantee there was a difference in the quality of the final images at least in part due to the quality of the lens.  He was happy with what he had to carry and apparently with the results he was getting, so that is really all that matters in the end!  Sometimes it can be a pain carrying the big glass, but for me, I prefer the results and capabilities that those lenses provide me so i deal with the size.

[Russ]

Simple example:  I was shooting photos at a lacrosse tournament using a 300 f/2.8 prime.  A Dad told me he didn't think there was any benefit to the big lens that I had when his 18-300 DX f/3.5-5.6 also went to 300 and he could shoot wider too if he wanted to. 

Funny!

 

Generally the rule is, the higher the zoom ratio of a lens, the more compromises have to be made in sharpness, distortion etc. But if it's good enough for you, and they are still good, then go for it.

[MJL]

I used a number of "long range" or "super" zooms in the range of 10X to 15X.  Their IQ & AF speed are generally acceptable outdoor on a sunny day.  One major limitation of these zooms to me is they reach f/5.6 or even f/6.3 very early in the zoom range.  I think the Bigma 50-500 reaches f/6.3 ~ 270mm, therefore it will start having problem to focus swiftly in the shade and also require a higher ISO to maintain appropriate shutter speed.

[Chrisf]

If you have such a long zoom range you will end up with a smaller area that is optimized in sharpness. That is usually at the long end on zooms. In the end it does depend if you are looking for long or short range. Which would you have more use for?