Originally Posted by panicos81
wow thread ressurected. i now have the 35mm f1.8 and the tokina 11-16mm and they cover my needs. maybe a zoom in the future but i dont like them. for longer range imay get the 105 or 135mm.
Two zooms to consider IMO, 70-300 VR or (for four times more) 70-200 VRII. Both are solid, well built lenses. While they are both full-frame lenses, that's not why you'd get them...even if you have a 5100. It's the quality of the lenses. The 70-200 is very fast, so the premium you pay is really only required for indoor sports shots..the 70-300 is great outdoors.
While you might be tempted to look at the 55-200 DX or the 55-300 DX, the money you invest in glass is not wasted. With what you've described, I think you'd love the 70-300 VR. I have a D5000 and bought the 70-300 both on the recommendation of a professional photographer friend (who has a 70-200 VRII I borrowed before my purchase), and from my own comparison of the 70-300 relative to the two 55-200/300 DX zooms.
Firstly, the 55-200's plastic mount didn't sit easy with me. Don't get me wrong, it's a relatively sharp and light lens, but...well, I didn't like the non-internal focus and the feel of the lens...a fair bit of zoom creep. The 55-300 had a metal mount, but I didn't like the feel of the two-piece zoom tube (in addition to the main barrel) and the zoom creep was even worse on this lens than the 55-200. Again, lack of internal focus was irritating and rotates the end of the lens, which would be a problem with polarizing filters (which I like to use at times, in place of my standard neutral density filter).
Without having to pay the ~$2000-ish for the 70-200 VRII, the 70-300 gives a fairly reasonable "semi-pro" build and feel to a telezoom, and for $400-ish, it's a pretty good value. FWIW, I think the VR performance of the 70-300 is much better than either of the 55mm DX zooms.
Mein zwei pfenning,