I need to lose weight

I have a D70s with 50mm F1.4, 20mm F2.8 and 12-24mm Nikon lenses...all the latest. Only thing is I don't like changing or carting heavy lenses around. So I normally end up putting one of the primes on and leaving it at that. In fact it's a very good idea that many could profit from. But sometimes I would just like one lens to cover everything. My ideal would be a 14-50mm, now there are some around that sort of range but they seem to be divided into 'Pro' and 'Amateur' specs. All the former are huge and far too heavy, all the latter built down to a price. Does anyone have some suggestion, speed is of no importance, optical excellence and build quality is.. I don't even mind going over to another manufacturer for camera and/or lens.

Brian.

Hello Brian,

You may with to consider a 28-105mm zoom lens - Nikon,Canon and Tokina for instance,all good lenses.

Good luck with your choice.

altie

The Pentax K10D with the superb SMC Pentax-DA 16-45mm. A fantastic combination and a very reasonable price.

John

altie, thanks but I did say around 14-50mm.

That could be an idea John. trouble is when I think digital Canon and Nikon spring to mind. Although I have got a Leica Digilux 2. Nice camera with the Worlds worst viewfinder. Mind you it's back in Germany having a new CCD fitted....seems they have a tendency to blow up. I did think the new Digilux3 might fit the bill, then discovered the lens which was ideal being 14-50mm which was just what I wanted........had a crop factor of 2x.

Another way round would be a 14/15-35mm and keep the 50mm prime for the odd portrait. I have for most of my life used R/F cameras hence the digital effect of the 50mm is a telephoto for me. Until I started in Digital a couple of years ago I had never owned anything but a full manual camera so its is all a bit strange for me. Wish I could afford the new M8, but investing so much on a digital system is something I couldn't contemplate.

Brian.

Sorry about that,Brian - see what age does to you!

altie

altie I know the feeling only too well.

But funnily enough you may have hit on the answer.

As I said earlier I have the Nikon 12-24 which is a great lens but horrendously heavy and on a D70s hopelessly unbalanced. But having said that I don't think anything is going to beat it for the range it covers. So perhaps the thing to do is buy the wife a new, slightly larger handbag:) And then buy a lens that covers the 24MM to whatever range. The Sigma 17-50 reviewed on this site appears to be a very good choice although a bit heavy. But checking around I find that loads of people are on about the Sigma 17-70mm. Lighter by a lot and a lot cheaper. I like the lighter bit but does the reduced cost mean cheap and nasty build quality? Trouble is I can't find a review on this site. (hint)

Brian.

Yesterday I tried out the Sigma 17-50mm. Sorry to report it was awful. The assistant told me that they vary from great to rubbish.

I have no knowledge of second party lenses but I do read on various forums others report lack of basic quality control and enormous variations in terms of performance.
It's all very well saying that you can take unsatisfactory items back. I have far better things to do than spend my time going back and forth to camera shops.

Once again I think the rule that "you get what you pay for" comes into the frame.But even here is that true. I have just looked at Ramsgate harbour taken with the Nikkor 17-55 it's terrible and that isn't exactly a budget lens.

What is going wrong? Is it that lenses are now being made in Thailand and China? Even then don't Nikon etc exercise some QA? My digilux2 has a lens inscribed Leica, but it isn't, it's made by a television company, Panasonic. But Leica ensure that it's built to their standard..and it is. My Sony R1 has a lens marked Zeiss, here again it isn't but what a lens. In fact the R1 is a hell of a good camera if somewhat bulky.



Brian.

If you break out of the feeling that it has to be Canon/Nikon/Sigma then you can indeed get very high quality compact Pentax lenses to go with the aforementioned K10D. These will have the attributes you are looking for - why not have a look in a local store?

John

Yes John, Nikon and Canon do seem to have the image. I agree from comments on this and other forums that Pentax thoroughly deserve consideration.

However thinking this through I just couldn't work out why I needed a zoom lens at all....I have never liked them. In fact when I started with digital I bought the Tamron 14mm to satisfy my need for effectively a 21 on digital. When the Nikon 12-24 came out I swapped, trouble with both were size. That was about three years ago and the 12-24 has remained my only zoom. But I thought that with new DX designs someone would have made a top quality zoom around the 14-50mm range weighing in about 200gmms, with a sensible size lens hood rather than those silly Tulip things. But they don't so I shall just add a F1.4 35mm Nikkor and forget zooms.

This thread has certainly helped to pull me back onto the true path......except running around camera shops I have fallen for.....a D200, it even feels like a real camera.:)


Brian.