Lens Advice for Nikon D3100

[From A Buick 8]

I got my wife a Nikon D3100 for Christmas. I would like to also pick up a telephoto lens. I was looking at these two. Any thoughts about them, i know there are not top of the line but are they worth messing with.

Nikkor DX 55-300mm VR telephoto super-zoom
or
Tamron AF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 LD for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

 

[7thMac]

For Nikon I recommend sticking with Nikon lenses, even for their less-expensive lines. Either the 55-200 or the 55-300 would be fine and will work perfectly with the D3100. The Tamron is not a good choice for the camera you bought. It lacks an internal motor and therefore will not auto-focus with this Nikon body.

 

[From A Buick 8]

thank you that is good to know.

 

[From A Buick 8]

Not sure what happened but the Nikkor lens i meant to ask about was
Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6G AF Nikkor SLR Camera Lens

Not the VR

Also how about this one. I know not a Nikon, but is Sigma a better choice then Tamron.

Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 SLD DG Macro Lens with built in motor for Nikon Digital

 

[admwright]

Not sure what happened but the Nikkor lens i meant to ask about was
Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6G AF Nikkor SLR Camera Lens

Not the VR

From what I have heard the non-VR 70-300 is not so good, the 70-300 VR is much better for the money and possibly better than the 55-300DX. The advantage of the DX lenses are size and weight, much smaller. I have the 55-200VR and have been very pleased with it. The only thing I want is more reach as I like taking pictures of small birds in our garden and deer over the fence.

All the best
Andrew W.

 

[7thMac]

You should double-check, but I don't think the 70-300mm Nikon has an internal motor. If not, then look to one of the other Nikon zoons with internal focus motors.

 

[iShater]

I have the Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6G AF Nikkor SLR Camera Lens VR. For the price, it is a great lens.

I have taken it on Safari, used it at home with the kid, and I really enjoyed using it.

 

[fehhkk]

For a prime lens, get the Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 ; great for low light shots.

 

[Kalison]

35 1.8 no question. It's a great walk around and equiv to 52mm. Great for low light. Your telephoto choices won't be able to get any low light shots. Your wife can just take the 3100 and 35mm and shoot just about anything in almost any light.

If you still are interested in the 70-300 non VR. Since it looks like you're sticking to the 150-200 price range I'd go with the Nikkor. However the Tammy has the advantage that it can focus a little closer. Both of these have about the same short comings at the 200-300 area, they get a little soft with some CA. Both should have a built in motor to focus on the 3100. They aren't speed demons in focusing either.

The 55-300 is a newer one. I have only tried it in the shop. Seems like Imit should be a good lens. I didn't pay attention to the focus speed. It's also a slower lens so low light shots are not going to be fun. However nice day shots will be just fine, much like the 70-300 lenses.

I guess I'd probably go for the 55-300 it has VR which is nice for tele shooting. But consider a nice prime. Nothing beats primes in most conditions.

 

[7thMac]

I have the 35mm 1.8. It's very nice. But I get such great results with the 18-55mm that I seldom use the 35mm. The zoom is much more versatile, and if not up to the same sharpness as the prime, I'm still quite happy with the image quality.

 

[Kalison]

I have the 35mm 1.8. It's very nice. But I get such great results with the 18-55mm that I seldom use the 35mm. The zoom is much more versatile, and if not up to the same sharpness as the prime, I'm still quite happy with the image quality.

I agree and disagree. Hehe. The kit zoom is actually quite good, but again it's a slow lens. So unless you're pumping ISO you can't get the same clean shots (or shutter speeds) in low light without some sort of flash. Seriously though the kit zoom is excellent, second only to the Pentax 18-55 I had.

I'm an available light guy so I really hate flash unless it's studio or controlled situations. So for me low light candids and clean shots without raising ISO too high is all about a good fast prime.

My D700 has a 50 on it at all times unless I am sure there is no way to get closer to what I am shooting. It's the best focal (well maybe 35 as well) to grab when you aren't sure what you're going to get, very versitile view and when lighting is in question it's fast for that too. I am also much more creative when I have only one focal length to use.

Anyway different strokes different folks.

 

[avro707]

The 70-300mm AF-G non-VR lens (in shiny gold box) is not one of the great Nikon lenses.

A better bet is the 70-300mm VR Zoom-Nikkor. It is quite a good one. A new choice is the 28-300mm Zoom-Nikkor.

Another choice, though not as practical everywhere is the AF-S Nikkor 300mm F/4.0 prime - this lens is light and very sharp, though it has no VR.

 

[Abstract]

To answer the question regarding internal motors and such, your D3100 should be able to focus the following types of lenses:

Nikon AF-S lenses.
Sigma HSM lenses.

Not sure about Tamron, but I don't know if they have introduced similar motor systems just yet.


Oh, and as far as I know, Tamron makes, or used to make, the 70-300 mm lens for Nikon, and possibly the 55-200 mm lens as well. I guess sticking with Nikon may not always be the best advice, because Nikon doesn't necessarily make or even design the cheaper lenses. Nikon contracts out to a lens company, and the company is responsible for making the lens Nikon wants, and this lens must fall within certain (image quality) specs.

I'm not sure about the situation now, though. I haven't cared about camera-related hardware/lenses for ages.

 

[Des1]

I just purchased a Nikon D3100 C/W a Tamron AF 18-270 f/3.5-6.3.. Model 003 and it takes super pic's. Pretty well all the average person will need. Would highly recommend this lens.