Sigma 70-300 F4-5.6 DG Macro M vs Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-200 f/4-5.6G IF-ED VR Lens

[MongooseMan]

Ok, to avoid hijacking an existing thread, I thought I'd make a new one.

I have a Nikon D3000 with the standard 18-55mm lens.

Looking to expand my horizons, so to speak, with a new lens (going to the Berg next week, so seemed a good a time as any to get it, want to capture moutains, some tennis, some animals, etc).

Question: Which of these would you recommend:
Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 DG Macro M for Nikon for R1799
or
Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED VR Lens for R1895

Thoughts? (An explaination of the various acronyms after the lens names would also not go amiss )

 

[BobJones]

Try here for lens designation info and here for kit reviews.

 

[MongooseMan]

Thanks, will do.
Quite keen to get personal opinions/recommendations from the guys here as well though...

 

[BobJones]

Sorry, haven't used either, but the Nikon 70-300 VR is probably one of the best lenses available for the price.

 

[MongooseMan]

Yeah, unfortunately "the price" is well above these 2 options, and well out of range for me at the moment.

 

[BobJones]

Sorry to tell you this, but you are probably going to spend a lot more than R6,000 on a lens in future.
Lenses in the sub R3,000 range are the exception rather than the rule.

Think long and hard what you are going to use the lens for and then buy the best you can afford. You can sometimes get some great bargains. Then think about how many lenses you want to carry with you and how often you are going to end up swapping them.

Maybe you should consider a 'one lens for all things' like a 18-200 or 28-300?

 

[MongooseMan]

Yeah, well aware of the future costs (there seems to be an exponential relationship between time spent looking at camera equipment, and the amount of money one wants to spend), but the point remains that, right now, I can't afford more than R2k.

So I'm looking to get the best I can for now.

Thanks.

 

[BobJones]

Granted....

Have you considered saving the R2,000 towards a lens you really want and will use for years and use the holiday to try some bipedal zoom? Using your feet to frame your shot may do wonders as a learning experience.

 

[MongooseMan]

(Pre-warning: Sorry to come off as argumentative, but I'm enjoying playing devil's advocate here, mostly because you're raising valid points.)

In my mind I'd rather get the practice with the larger lens now and then, once I can afford a better one, sell it to offset the cost.
Obviously I wouldn't recoup the full cost but (1) I reckon the practice and joy now is worth it and (2) the lost money would be fairly insignificant relative to the total price of the more expensive lens.

 

[BobJones]

At this rate why not sell off the D3000 and get the triple lens kit D3100 - or a D7000 + 18-200?

Since you want to take it slow - get the 55-200 and make sure to post the pics from the berg when you get back. The 18-55 + 55-200 make a good set for use and later re-sale.

If you are going to to be taking lots of pics of people and a couple of scenic shots - sell the 18-55 and get the 35mm 1.8 and use your feet. You'll be fascinated with what f1.8-3.5 gives you above the built in zoom.

 

[MongooseMan]

At this rate why not sell off the D3000 and get the triple lens kit D3100

I presume you're talking about this one? Very (very) nice, but considering the fact that I'd be lucky to get R4k for my current, that still leaves me 6k short

Thanks for the advice though, I'm leaning towards the 55-200 and, as you say, it does give me a nice package for resale later in life.

Edit: Holy socket-wrench that Orms deal is ridiculous...

 

[BobJones]

Yep, it's at Makro as well. I really can't think of a better deal at the entry level.

The 35mm is just bait to get you hooked on spending exorbitant amounts on fixed focal lenses later on.

Good luck with your purchase - whatever you decide.

 

[MongooseMan]

Flip, /me is now trying to sell things in order to buy that triple lens kit ;D

 

[losectrl]

Ok, to avoid hijacking an existing thread, I thought I'd make a new one.

I have a Nikon D3000 with the standard 18-55mm lens.

Looking to expand my horizons, so to speak, with a new lens (going to the Berg next week, so seemed a good a time as any to get it, want to capture moutains, some tennis, some animals, etc).

Question: Which of these would you recommend:
Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 DG Macro M for Nikon for R1799
or
Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED VR Lens for R1895

Thoughts? (An explaination of the various acronyms after the lens names would also not go amiss )

After I got my first SLR kit lens (18mm-55mm) , I got my self the Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 DG Macro. Then I later realized that I should rather have spent a grand or so more and got my self a 18mm-200mm Sigma lens.

 

[MongooseMan]

I ended up getting the triple lens kit, which came with the standard 18-55, plus a 55-300 and a 35mm 1.8.

Enjoying it greatly.