D40-replacement lens upgrade

[bazzzz]

I currently have a Nikon D40.

http://reviews.cnet.co.uk/digital-sl...9285620/specs/

My girlfriend has a canon powershot sx 210 IS

http://reviews.cnet.co.uk/compact-di...view-49305368/

Her camera takes vastly superior photos to mine not least because she has 14X zoom while I have 3x zoom. (I disagree with the CNET review btw- I’ve seen her photos I can tell you they are awesome...)

I have two options ( I believe) :
1) Buy a canon powershot for approx £194
2) Buy a new lens for the same amount

Can you recommend a lens for the D40 which will have a 14 x zoom or close to it.? Perhaps one does not exist for under £200

Thanks for your help in advance

[Eyeayen]

That's a tough one.

You have a bigger sensor than her Canon SX120 IS so you should be able to print larger photo's even though you've got less megapixels.

The trouble with lenses is you really do get what you pay for. So for £200 you won't get much, unless you can find something second hand on ebay or similar sites.

Tamron do some cheap lenses, that are under £200
http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-...n-fit/p1031627

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-...n-fit/p1030157

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-...n-fit/p1011873

There are reviews on line of them but if I was you I'd try and save a bit more cash and get something a little more expensive.

So what is so vastly superior to her photo's over yours ? Is it just your ones need some computer processing to bring the colours out a bit more and sort other things out or are hers more detailed, enlarge better, crisper details ???

Can you post a couple so we can compare ?

If I were you I'd go to your local camera retailer, ask to try some lenses on your camera, take some photo's and then when you get home print and compare quality, this way you can see what you get for your money and how far the zoom is, ideally take your girlfriend along with her camera to take same said photo's exploring the zoom range and see whose comes out better when they're enlarged ?

[bazzzz]

Thanks for the reply. Very helpful.

Originally Posted by Eyeayen

That's a tough one.

So what is so vastly superior to her photo's over yours ? Is it just your ones need some computer processing to bring the colours out a bit more and sort other things out or are hers more detailed, enlarge better, crisper details ???

My post was a little sloppy. It's just that she has 14x zoom which means her camera is more versatile and allows her to take more interesting and varied photos. Its the zoom alone with which I take issue. If she stuck to 3 x zoom then the quality of pictures would not be that noticeable to the naked eye-although she does have a wonderful eye for composition, much better than me.

I have done quite a bit of research and did conclude you can't get much for £200. So thanks for confirming that. Ioriginally assumed I would be able to get a lens for £200 compatible with the d40 with a similar zoom to her canon. It seems you get serious value for money with the Canon. Or I have I become zoom fixated?

[bazzzz]

Also, thanks for posting the links.

I've looked at the specs and I need to compare like for like.

The zoom on my D40 is desrcibed as 'x3' while the zoom on her Canon is 'x14'.

I am unable to compare the zoom on the Tamron with our cameras because they are expressed in more techinical terms. Is there any way of working out the zoom range to compare with our cameras?

Would I be right in assuming the Tamrons you've linked are superior to the kit lens supplied with the 40? I assume so because I understand from other forums the D40 lens is quite basic.

I've compared the specs between the Tamron's and D40 but do not understand the technical stuff otherwise I would wortk out their relative quality myself.

I've noticed this:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-55-200...0346719&sr=8-1

It says in the specs section: :
'A high-quality compact 3.6x DX zoom lens'. Would I be right in assuming it has only 3x zoom? If so, amazing to think it originally cost over £300.
Thanks for your help.

[silversnapper1]

Hi bazzzz.

The 55-200 is indeed a 3.6x zoom lens. This refers to the zoom from shortest to longest so 55 x 3.6 = 198 or near enough 200.

I think that what you want to look at between the two cameras is the 35mm equivalent.

The powershot has a 28mm wide angle x14 lens which will give 392mm (say 400mm) at 35mm equivalent.

If you put say a 70-300mm lens on your d40, that together with the crop factor of 1.5 will give you 450mm at 35mm equivalent at full 300mm zoom.

Hope that this helps.

Steve.

[Eyeayen]

Bazzzz, just to clarify Steve's point above if you aren't that techy. Your camera has a sensor in it that is an APS-C sized sensor. This is smaller than the original 35mm negative an SLR would use. So to work out a lenses size you need to times it by a factor of 1.5. Therefore the 70-300 lens on your camera will become a 105 - 450.

If I were you I'd look at the Tamron 18-270, it will give you a great range through the entire focal length. It's had reasonable reviews but might be slightly over your budget, you do get what you pay for so just ask for money from Santa Claus this year and you're onto a winner

Hope that helps and makes sense. Let us know how you get on

[OldBoy]

Just to point out that a 70-300mm lens on a D40 give the same zoom as on a full frame camera. What is different is the field view of view from your camera will be the same as using a 105-450mm lens on a full frame camera.

[bazzzz]

Thanks for your help and time. Much food for thought-off to do some research.

[James Blonde]

FWIW, the Sigma 70-300 DG F4.5-6 is a nice basic zoom lens that you'll get for a lot less than £200.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sigma-70-300...1037153&sr=8-1

I'm sure Jessops do it for not a lot more.

Whilst it does have a "macro" mode, It has no real bells and whistles and isn't image stabilised. I'm also not too sure whether it will "work" on the D40 - I'm sure others will be able to confirm.

Having both a good spec high-zoom compact and a DSLR, my feeling is that if you get rid of your D40 in preference to a compact, you'll be clamouring for the flexibility and speed of the SLR before long. I love my Panasonic Lumix TZ5 10x compact as a backup that I can just shove in my pocket, but I've found it slow, inflexible and useless when needed in a hurry - shutter lag is a killer! You can't add lenses or filters to a compact when you start getting more confident and experienced, and they don't have the range of manual options that an SLR does.

To me, photography is mostly down to composition skills and patience - I have neither! :P However a good photographer can take a good picture with a rubbish compact, and a bad photographer can have the best camera in the world and still take rubbish pictures. Personally, I'd work with (and look to add to) what you've got, and maybe do some classes?