Q2 of 20

[jtt1888]

Had a thread a fortnight ago looking for a recommendation on a camera, ended up going for a Nikon 5100.

Delighted with the camera, pq is way beyond what I expected, not so sure about the lens. I went for the body only and bought a VR 55-200 rather than the standard 18-50.

90% of my snaps will be my kids playing by the pool, football, cycling, or general family snaps. I've realised that I probably need something wider than the one I've bought, perhaps the kit lens would have been perfect.

My mate let me use his 20mm prime lens for a couple of days but i felt it was too wide, I.e it wouldn't let me capture them playing at distance as we'll as when they are right in my face.

Im looking for some recommendations for a budget lens to tick most of my boxes,

 

[Gromit]

Jim - the Tamron 17-50/f2.8 gets extremely good press and seems to be a popular upgrade to the standard 18-55 kit lens (be it Canon or Nikon). The Tammy tends to go for £200 upwards - more for the VC (stabilised) version. Worth noting that the earlier non-VC version is said to be better optically.

 

[macvisual]

Have a look at the Samyang 35mm f/1.4 (manual focus) lens, not too expensive and great results if you don't mind manual focus.

I've been using mine for 18 months or so with great results. 'UK Digital' stock/sell them.

 

[mikehit]

+1 for the Tamron 17-50. I tried it and it is very very close in quality to the very excellent Canon 17-55. And it has the advantage over the kit lenses of f2.8 for indoor use.

If you want the 'playing at a distance' and 'in your face' and want to minimise lens changes, then one very good option is the Tamron 18-270. Being a superzoom it does have compromises at both ends of the range but if you view your images on the web or on screen then to be honest these deficiencies will be less noticable. I think this blog shows what it is capable of - they guy did '365 project' which is taking one picture a day for a year and he really put the lens through its paces with close-up, to wide angle to full zoom.

http://www.discreetphoton.co.uk/gallery/tamron-365-project-9520

 

[Gromit]

If you want the 'playing at a distance' and 'in your face' and want to minimise lens changes, then one very good option is the Tamron 18-270. Being a superzoom it does have compromises at both ends of the range but if you view your images on the web or on screen then to be honest these deficiencies will be less noticable.

This very much echoes the views of the (very helpful) guys in LCE in Lincoln where I bought my Tamron 70-300 from. Of course a zoom with such a huge range (the 18-270 that is) is never going to be the magic bullet, but it's a damn good stab at the one-lens-fits-all role. For family holidays and 'grabbing the moment' sort of stuff it's got to be a great choice.

 

[Tony_J]

Had a thread a fortnight ago looking for a recommendation on a camera, ended up going for a Nikon 5100.Delighted with the camera, pq is way beyond what I expected, not so sure about the lens. I went for the body only and bought a VR 55-200 rather than the standard 18-50.

90% of my snaps will be my kids playing by the pool, football, cycling, or general family snaps. I've realised that I probably need something wider than the one I've bought, perhaps the kit lens would have been perfect.

My mate let me use his 20mm prime lens for a couple of days but i felt it was too wide, I.e it wouldn't let me capture them playing at distance as we'll as when they are right in my face.

Im looking for some recommendations for a budget lens to tick most of my boxes,

Good choice of camera - I'm continually amazed at the "bang for the buck" that you get with modern SLRs even at the entry level.

A tad up price-wise from the 18-55, the Nikon 18-105 is a great all-round lens for the kind of uses you are talking about. If you want better IQ, the Nikon 16-85 is excellent, but you are talking £440 vs £205 for the 18-105 (Warehouse Express prices) and to be frank, it is unlikely that you would tell the difference IQ-wise without a test chart & a magnifying glass. I own both of these; the 18-105 came as the kit lens with my D90 and the 16-86 I bought as a fixer-upper on eBay which ended up a much cheaper option than buying new even after the cost of the Nikon repair work. They both have the "proper" AF motors that allow manual correction of focus at all times in AF mode, which the budget zooms (e.g., the 18-55 and the 55-200, and most of the independents) don't. For that reason alone, I stick with the (non-budget) Nikon offerings - it makes a big difference when you want to do something a bit more challenging than just taking snaps.

 

[jtt1888]

Thanks guys, info much appreciated.

I'm off on holiday to the Dolomites next week so i'll put the 55-200 through its paces before deciding if i will definately need a wider lens. I'll keep the recommendations above in mind for my return.

Heres hoping i can produce a couple of pictures worthy of the wams random snap thread.

 

[rockmeister]

95% of my pics are taken with the 18-105 mentioned above, and it's performance and range compliment what you now have perfectly. If you want more encouragement, Nikon put it out as the kit lens with the new D7100, so if it's good enough for that.....

 

[HectorHughMunro]

Jim - the Tamron 17-50/f2.8 gets extremely good press and seems to be a popular upgrade to the standard 18-55 kit lens (be it Canon or Nikon). The Tammy tends to go for £200 upwards - more for the VC (stabilised) version. Worth noting that the earlier non-VC version is said to be better optically.

The 17-50 is indeed excellent and is a 26- 75 in 35mm terms on your 5100. I used one on my Canon 600d and it never left the camera. One other to think about would be a really simple prime; http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-35mm-1-8G/dp/B001S2PPT0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1373651350&sr=8-1&keywords=nikkor+35mm . Nikon sell an enormous number of these for crop sensor cameras (like yours), basically because it is equivalent to a standard 50mm prime on a 35mm camera and because it's an outstanding lens for not much money.