Lens length & nikon zoom advice

[Spathodus77]

Hi all,

I currently have a Nikon D5200 with the kit lens (18mm to 55mm). I often go to Castle Combe and next time intend to get some good pictures of the cars on track. To help with this I'd like to get a zoom lens (budget £600). The lenses I'm considering are:

Nikon 18-200mm F/3.5-5.6G ED VR2 (£540)
Sigma 18-250mm F/3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM (£300)
Nikon 70-300mm F/4.5 -5.6 VR (£300)
Nikon 18-105mm F/3.5-5.6 VR (£200)

Does anyone have any experience with these lenses? Should I be considering other options? I'm keen to keep the weight down/practicality up and also don't want to spend any more than neccessary. My gut feel is that my current max zoom of 55mm may almost be enough to capture the type of shots I want, so the 18-105mm would probably cover my needs. I have read that the 70-300mmm takes ages to auto focus so that is probably out as an option.

Also, please can someone tell me if there a some kind of calculation that can be done to confirm that if you know the size of the object and various distances what lens length is needed to get it to fill the viewfinder?

Thanks,

Ralph

[Simpo Two]

Hi Ralph,
I have the Nikon 70-300VR and it's a fine lens; it focuses perfectly well to me. The only issue you may have is that if you're following a car and it gets too close it may not fit in the viewfinder. Generally with lenses the more you pay the better it will be.
There may well be a calculation as you suggest but I don't know it. Where's Rob when you need him?

[Adenauer]

I have a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 as a result of me asking a similar question on here a while ago. I use it for all of my ring photography and love it.

[Janesy B]

You'll want a 70-200 or 70-300 lens, ignore the travel zooms (18-200 odd) as they are not great optically and pretty slow.

[Lucas CAV]

Simpo Two said:

Hi Ralph,
I have the Nikon 70-300VR and it's a fine lens; it focuses perfectly well to me. The only issue you may have is that if you're following a car and it gets too close it may not fit in the viewfinder. Generally with lenses the more you pay the better it will be.
There may well be a calculation as you suggest but I don't know it. Where's Rob when you need him?

I echo what Simpo says about the 70-300mm VR -- a good lens for the money.

[upsidedownmark]

Ditto. You can never have too much length. I've a 70-200 and frequently run a teleconverter on it for track stuff.

AF speed isn't actually a big issue for track photography, cars move fairly predictably

[ffc]

My wife likes her Nikon 70-300 a lot and prefers it over my 28-300 as it focuses faster.

[budfox]

With £600 to spend I'd go for the 70-300 and then save more money. Once you've got another £600 sell the 70-300 and find the best used 70-200 f2.8 you can. Then save a few more pounds and buy the 1.4x teleconverter. You'll end up with one of the best lenses Nikon have made, more flexibility, and more light gathering loveliness.

[Spathodus77]

Thanks for the advice, I was kind of leaning towards the 18-200, but based on this I'll plump for the 70-300 and save myself the extra cash.

Ralph

[Turn7]

There's always good used 70-300vr's for sale on talk photography if you are on there.

Bought 80% id my gear From there.

[chris.mapey]

I could throw a wild card into the mix and offer the Sigma 50-500?

Whenever I shoot at a track I like to have the maximum reach available...

Just a thought (I tend to use my 70-200 f2.8 Sigma with a 2x t/c though!)

[cornet]

The 70-300 VR is a cracking lens, especially at £300.

Always amazes me just quite how good it is for the money, even on my D600 it still holds its own.



I've got a 18-200mm which I don't use anymore owing to me having a 17-55mm 2.8 for my D90. It's a great do-all lens though if you don't like carrying extra kit around.