hi
looking for all around lens
sub 200$
found tamron 28-200 for great price
also looking at sigma 28-200/28-135

suggestions needed:eek:

I think sub-$200 is aiming pretty low- and I don't think 28mm is wide enough for most people on digital. It can be pretty restricting.
Aim a bit higher, if you ask me, for about $350 you can get a Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3...and trust me although 18-28mm doesn't sound like much of a difference, it is a TOTALLY different world when it comes to digital.

Or, if you don't want to pony up that much even for a major difference in range, for about $270 you can get the superb Nikon 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF.

I have a D50 with the basic 18-50mm lens. I am looking to upgrade, too. What about the Nikon 18-70mm lens that comes with the D70s? Would it be a big enough upgrade to justify a few hundred bucks?

hi
looking for all around lens
sub 200$
found tamron 28-200 for great price
also looking at sigma 28-200/28-135

suggestions needed:eek:

If it was me, I'd opt for the Nikon 18-70mm. That's the equivalent of a 35 -105mm, which is a great range and will cover most situations. Later, get a 70-300mm f4-5.6 for your telephoto work. Sigma makes one for $210.

My two cents worth.

I've heard good things about the Nikon 18-70, and that's the one I would go with. 28mm just isn't very wide on a DSLR. Like it was mentioned, it's only a 10mm difference but it's really a 35% difference. With 35mm cameras, I was really surprised how much wider a 24mm was than my 28mm - and the 20mm seemed like an even bigger difference.

The 18-70 is a good lens. I got myself a D50 kit with the plastic 17-55 lens. The image quality surprised me! Ok, it's not as sharp as my 50 prime, but you can get yourself a standard zoom for under 100$. Do not get a 28-something; it's not wide enough...