# Nikon lenses and autofocus.



## Andy M (Apr 7, 2006)

Hi ive got a D80 which has the ability to work with all lenses due to the built in autofocus motor in the body.

It works OK with my 70-300mm lens however the focus is noisy and in general the lens just seems a bit cheap.

I have a 18-70 with the silent motor and it is fantastic. Im after a lens to compliment this and give me telephoto. Something like 70-200 or 55-200. 

If going for say a sigma, how will i tell if it has an inbuilt motor? do you look for AF-S? My mate bought a Sigma 18-200 for his D80 and it turned out to not have a built in motor even though the guy in the shop said it had, so he now has a noisy drive motor when focussing. I dont want anything like this, I want inbuilt silent motor as they are quicker.

Any recommendations? About £250 to spend.


----------



## Gary-360 (Apr 26, 2008)

18-200VR is a great general purpose lens, second hand prices are about £250/£300; I have one as a traveller. 
You won't get a Sigma or Nikon 70-200 for £250 even second hand.


----------



## Andy M (Apr 7, 2006)

Id get a 18-200vr, but then that would render my 18-70 useless really wouldn't it?


----------



## Gary-360 (Apr 26, 2008)

Edit that, I just checked Ebay and the 18-200VR is still selling for about £350/£400 second hand!!


----------



## Gary-360 (Apr 26, 2008)

Andy M said:


> Id get a 18-200vr, but then that would render my 18-70 useless really wouldn't it?


The 18-70 is a great lens for Portraits and relatively close work and is deemed a great sharp lens by the pro's; I only sold mine when I bought the 17-55 f2.8.


----------



## Andy M (Apr 7, 2006)

OK so its better to have a 70-200 than a 17-200mm then i take it.

Id rather wait another week and buy once and know its right.


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

For the sigma lens you need to look out for HSM


----------



## Gary-360 (Apr 26, 2008)

Andy M said:


> OK so its better to have a 70-200 than a 17-200mm then i take it.
> 
> Id rather wait another week and buy once and know its right.


I have the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 HSM, it is a fast lens so Ideal for low light and sports photography; this does come at a price however and you could expect to pay £600 (ish) new, and £350-£450 second hand.


----------



## Andy M (Apr 7, 2006)

Hmmm im undecided between the Nikon 70-300 VR and the Nikon 18-200 VR. The 18 is more expensive and im sacrificing far reach for wide angle when I already have that.


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

what's the max budget you can stretch to?


----------



## Andy M (Apr 7, 2006)

Well im not really short of money, its more of what do i consider a sane amount to spend on a lens. 
Rather than take cost as a primary factor, what do you recommend mate?

I don't really want anything too big and bulky. Thats the only point.


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/prod151.html

£660

Nikkor 80-200 f2.8

It's basically the 70-200 with out the VR and slightly less at the wide end. Also slightly sharper.


----------



## Gary-360 (Apr 26, 2008)

Not short of money?

How about this monster then 










Sigma 200-500mm APO F2.8, retails about £19000


----------



## James_R (Jun 28, 2007)

Hi Andy, I have a D80 and had this same dilemma a few weeks back.

Bought mine with the 18-55 VR lens. Wanted something with a bit more reach, but didnt really want to be swapping lenses too much.

Had a look at the Nikon 70-300VR and the Sigma 18-200 OS.

The Nikon is a very well built piece of kit but is bulky and heavy.
The Sigma has a more useable wide angle range and is well built but a bit more compact and lighter. Nice finish to materials on both lenses.

I went for the Sigma, it has the HSM in built near silent motor and is very fast to focus. I'm really happy with it and the optical stabilisation will give you a good 3 stops advantage over hand-holding a standard lens. I have tested this to good effect.:thumb:

Got mine when Jessops had a £100 of retail price - got it for £249 brand new.

Have you tried http://www.camerabox.co.uk/productD...HSM-Lens-(Nikon-Motorised-Fit)&ProductID=5048
or
http://www.cameraworld.co.uk/ViewPr...mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS &CAT_CODE=2&SUBCAT_CODE=204


----------



## Andy M (Apr 7, 2006)

Hi James, do you find yourself still using the 18-55 or have you just got the Sigma on all the time?

Andy


----------



## James_R (Jun 28, 2007)

Just got the Sigma on all the time Andy.

It is quite a bit heavier than the Nikon, if I wanted to travel light and knew I wouldnt need the extra zoom range I'd probably put the 18-55VR on.

Though it somewhat defeats the object of being ready for virtually any photo opportunity.

This lens gets great reviews, though a few people comment on patchy quality control, and edge definition around the 35mm focal length. I've only seen the 35mm problem on one review though.

Results seem pretty good to me, especially at the telephoto end, where other cheaper lenses go a bit duff.


----------

