DSLRUsers.com

i'm just looking for advice on the versatility of the 105VR as a walkaround travel lens. Heading to Asia for a month next year .....but looking for a chrissie present for myself now.

We will be on the move most of the trip so I dont want the weight or risk of taking the bigger lens or too many bits and pieces. Wife and kids definitely wont act as my packhorses!

I currently have the D70s, 1.4 50mm, 18 - 70, 70 - 200VR, 17TC, kenko tubes, SB 800 etc.

OPTION 1
I've always wanted a good macro lens like the 105 which I know is also a great portrait lens. Question is if it can do reasonable coverage of most day to day shooting I might get away with it and the 50mm.

OPTION 2
my other line of thinking - which will add 2 more lenses to the collection is a cheaper walkaround lens like the 24 -120 ( a sharp one!) and a tokina 12 -24. Nice and light kit and pretty versatile from what I read. also costs just a bit more than the 105VR alone

An 18 - 200VR costs a bit too much and basically duplicates what I have already.

I know I have to make the decision myself but any feedback on the 105s versatility would be great.

happy Christmas to you all!

cheers

rookie2

how about the tamron 90mm macro? i've heard a lot of good stuff about it and costs less than the 105.

If I was limited to only 1 or 2 lenses for a trip, I would stick with the kit lens and a wide such as the sigma 10-20 or nikon 12-24. If you're shooting scenery, these would suit much better then the 105

agree, I would not want a prime 105mm for travel.

I'd like a zoom, and 12-24 would be a first choice, then an 18-200.

If you already have the kit 18-70, I'd take that. As you are looking for a macro, and a walk about, maybe somehting with a macro function. I've seen some good results with the 18-200. For a simialr cost to the 105VR, you could get the 18-55DX?

Also, wondering what your typical distance to subject is for a head and shoulders shot, as 105 would be a tight crop in 1.5x.

They 105VR will be much much heavier and bigger than what you think it will be...

A while ago, we had a long discussion about this lens:
http://www.dslrusers.com/viewtopic.php?t=20164

At 105mm things are not long enough nor wide enough... its just at the range that you dont know what should you go... wider, or tighter??

Being portrait, its bit too long on the DX bodies. And with its macro characteristic, it does not remain f/2.8 on closer focus.

You already have an ultimate portrait setup with the 50/1.4 and 70-200VR, if you plan portraits with the VR, I dont think it is really that necessary for you.

Macro wise, it is real great lens, sharp and all that... IMHO the price will not justify its capability being used soley for macro work. AF-S -- doesnt work right for macro, manual focus is the way... VR -- do you need it at close range high magnification? No, it doesnt work.. but nice to be there, tripod kills VR straight away.

General walkaround lens? hmm, I cant say for this, I've done a few candid shot with this lens, VR sure does help you, AFS is quick and precise, pretty good for this purpose of hunting down candids... just dont snap the hood on when walking in town for candids...

Want usable macro lens, good old used MF Nikkors, way of a legend... AF design, Tamron 90, longer range, Sigmas 150...

Well ofcourse, you justify the need of this lens yourself.

Edit:
Travel wise, you will always want wider and wider until you see yourself in the frame...

I'll be taking my 105/2.8 (non VR) to Canada... but that is because I am crazy (also taking Gitzo + AUB + sigma 70-200 etc...)

If I wanted a "Travel lens", ie a light lens which is a jack of all trades I would look at either the new 18-200VR or the tried and true 24-120VR (Some one had one for sale, probably sold now)

Also depends on what you want to shoot... I'm going to Canada on monday (Gosh that sounds good to say) and I specifically bought the sigma 10-20 for that trip as I wanted Wiiiiiide shots...

Oh the 105 IS good for macro (der) but also it makes a longish portrait lens (is tack sharp!) and a medium tele lens for some action...

Yi-P wrote:Edit:
Travel wise, you will always want wider and wider until you see yourself in the frame...

Funny... I have one of those lenses (10-20).... You have to watch for arms and legs...

many thanks folks - just the info I needed.

i think I will settle on either the tokina 12 - 24/sigma 10 - 20 (havent looked at that one yet) and get a s/h 24 -120 VR maybe
i can always do macro with my tubes and the 50mm and if really keen on it get a macro prime later in life.

cheers

R2

MHD wrote:I specifically bought the sigma 10-20 for that trip as I wanted Wiiiiiide shots...

And to make it look as if you were a long way back.

there was a review sometime back comparing the sigma and the tamron and the tamron came out better. something else to consider

For my 2 bobs' worth, you're on the right track going for the 12-24. I just returned from a trip away in the bush where I took only the Tokina 12-24, Nikon 50mm 1.8 and the trusty Nikon 70-200 2.8VR. Didn't miss the kit lens or my 24-120 at all. I kept the Tokina on most of the time.

Although the 70-200 is weighty, the images it captures are well worth it. I have the 60mm 2.8 Micro Nikkor which I usually take along for macro work: it's not nearly as big as the 105 and takes great sharp shots, although max aperture drops to f3.3 like its bigger brother.

thanks timbo..maybe a good 10 -20 or 12 - 24 plus the 70 - 200 VR should cover me.

If something 'bad' happens, so be it, thats why we pay travel insurance!


cheers

rookie2

Damian - if you are considering a WA lens, here is a site covering the following lenses:

1- Nikon 12 - 24 mm f/4
2- Tokina 12 - 24 mm f/4
3- Sigma 10 - 20 mm f/4 - 5.6
4- Tamron 11 - 18 mm f/4.5 - 5.6

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/digital ... arison.htm

I believe there is another site, with a side by side review of the Nikon, Sigma, Tokina and Tamron 12-24, but I just can not remember where at the moment. I will keep looking, and or someone else may chip in with the information.

fozzie

fozzie

Thanks Fozzie

An excellent source of info and confirms my decision to go with the Tokina (much as I'd like to have the Nikon but cant justify that amount of $$)

Now I'm just waiting to see if there is another bargain sale from Thanh where I can snap one up!

I'll probably go with the 24 - 120VR as well as my walkaround travel lens.

Hope you are keeping well!

cheers

R2

R2/Damian - my pleasure. And 'Yes' I am well. If you want to trial the 24-120VR, please send me a PM or ring my mobile. BTW: I will be around over Xmas/New Year period. More than likely at Adelaide or Monarto Zoo on the Weekends or Public Holidays .

fozzie

Just quietly but isn't this thread in the wrong place ?

Alpha_7 wrote:Just quietly but isn't this thread in the wrong place ?

my apologies

..mods please move or delete if you want.

R2

rookie2 wrote:

Alpha_7 wrote:Just quietly but isn't this thread in the wrong place ?

my apologies

..mods please move or delete if you want.

R2

No need to delete it or apologise, I was just wondering if the mods are already on holiday as usually this would have been moved by now.