 BetterPhoto Member |
nikon d200 w/24-120 nikon.. is this lens a good primary... suggestions??
|
|
|
|
||
|
W. |
A 'primary' lens is a lens with a fixed focal length. So a '24-120' is not a primary at all. It's a zoom lens.
|
|
|
|
||
|
robert G. Fately |
Jon, the 24-120 is a decent lens, but with the crop factor of the D200 the wide angle side effectively behaves like a 35MM focal length on a film camera - which may not be wide enough for you (if it is, I'll sell you my 24-120). The 18-200 or new 18-135 may be a better bat on the DSLR, giving you more wide angle space to maneuver. And W, FYI a "Prime" lens is one of a single focal length, "primary" has no inherent photographic meaning and in Jon's query would imply, I believe, that he is asking if that lens is a good choice to be the one he uses and leaves on the camera most of the time.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Michael H. Cothran |
Jon, First, to differ with your first respondent, a "primary" lens is one which is your basic, everyday lens you use on your camera - so you are correct in your terminology. The first poster was thinking "prime" lenses as opposed to zoom lenses. To get to your inquiry, I bought the older version of this optic several years ago for my first digital camera, and did in fact use it as my "primary" lens. I have no complaints, and if used properly, it is an excellent performer. It's optimum aperture is f11, and you can expect excellent results from f8-f16. It is noticeably soft @ 120mm, so I would avoid stretching it out past about 100mm. It also has noticeable barrel distortion @ 24mm, so I would not recommend this lens (nor any zoom for that matter) for architecture. However, in general, it is a very good to excellent performer - probably not the best you can find, but certainly above average for the focal lengths it provides. And for those trips where you want to travel light with only one lens, this lens can't be beat! Michael H. Cothran
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||