I'd advice for you to go to shop or nikon centre to try out both lenses 1st and see which suits you better. Bring a friend/model along to test out the angle of view.

Agito: I used to think that way could solve the picking which focal length to choose issue too. But that is not the case. The main reason someone chooses to get a bright prime is because they are wow-ed by the bokeh and DOF. So to ask someone to test by turning the kit lens might sounds sound. But the fact is for someone that have not really had any hands on on the real thing, it's hard to make any final decisions and in the end will only submit to peer pressure into buying what others tell him is good.
The best way is to have a TT and get some friends or confidant who actually have the said lens to actually point out to him physically what to expect from each lens. Show him the MFD, resulting bokeh, angle of view, etc. But at the end of the day, doesn't pressure him into getting either one, but lets him choose for himself.

Not sure if all the blabbering makes sense to you all or not. But oh well, eugene88, either way you will love whichever lens you are going to get, that's pretty much a given.

This post has been edited by lwliam: Aug 26 2011, 11:49 PM

168257061, Hahaha. Then why did not u decide to suggest 50 f/1.4 as well?

Honestly, focal length numbers holds no significant meaning. It there to give u a rough idea what to be expected. I always find this crop factor issue confuses a lot of inexperienced shooters. Fx dx FF apsc. The thing that is the same after conversion is field of view and there's where the similarity ends. DOF is different even you're using a 50mm 2.8 on fx and 75mm 2.8 on dx. Something for you to ponder about.

-50mm f/1.8G and D is FF lens, can be use in DX camera. if put on DX camera it will be around 85mm?

-35mm f/1.8G is a dx lens, but actually the focal length in FF is around 52mm.

The 50 will have a 75mm angle of view on the dx body.
The 35mm will have 52mm AoV on a dx.
To put it in another words, using a 35mm lens on a dx, you will get more or less the same angle of view as when u are using a 50mm lens on an fx.

Honestly the way I see it, unless Canon and Nikon comes out with new ground breaking technology, there's no way they can outperform Translucent technology with the physical limitations conventional methods are facing now. So, with that said, until new groundbreaking tech is found, A77 is pwning the flagships at the moment. True story.

Aka mutants! X-men arise!

Geekster/Andy, yes lenses misaligning over time is possible due to loosening of lens mounts and holders. Older lenses keep their alignments better due to usage of stronger sturdier metals, which makes them heavier than modern lenses, which uses hard plastic instead to keep the weight down. This phenomenon happens more rapidly on zoom lenses than on primes, although primes are not spared due to the focusing movement of the lens elements.

On the camera body, misalignments happen in 2 ways. Sensor shift due to knocks on the body. The entire sensor is skewed out of its focal plane. The other cause is the AF sensor is shifted, causing the camera to tell the lens to focus away from the supposed focal plane of the sensor, but instead causes front or rear focusing issues.

Hihihehe, are Canon and Nikon your only option?

This post has been edited by lwliam: Aug 30 2011, 12:57 PM

Piscesguy, it's hard to survive on 50mm alone. Keep your kitlens until your have the resources to get an upgrade for it.

The rubber on the grip isn't covered under the warranty AFAIK

The vacuum could have drawn a huge amount of current from the wall plug, then since the connections are all interlinked (parallel), the high current could have blown off a component or fuse in the charger.

You could test if its still working or not by putting a half used battery in your camera and notice how many percentage is in the battery, then plug it into the charger and charge for about half an hour, see if there is any increase in charge.

Most of the time, taking only these 2 lenses into account, it's usually 18-105 will be having better image quality, with the logic being, smaller focal length range lenses have lesser complicated optical formulas compared to a larger one. This is because to have a lens to be able to get good images at 18mm, and also to have good ones at 200mm, that would be asking a lot from a lens. Now, let's ponder why primes (single focal length lenses are having so high IQs). Of course, the best if we could get 8-500mm f/3.5-5.6 lens all in one, now wouldn't we all want that?

So logically speaking, even without doing a comparison, I'd say that the 18-105 would win over the 18-200 anytime.

Easy to diagnose this vearn, close up to f/11 and 1 sec shutter and shoot a wall. Ur hands doesn't need to be stable, heck, u don't even have to focus. In fact the blurer the better. If it appears, you now then take another lens and repeat those steps. You know how to draw the conclusion from those 2 steps now, don't you?

Bensow, the 18-55 is a 28-70 equivalent, also another standard zoom during the film era.

18mm is written on a DX lens. You look thru it inside a d5100 then u will see the same view if you put a 28mm FX lens on a D700.

---

Added on September 2, 2011, 10:29 pmThere is actually a number of focal length ranges that are brought over from the film times.

(APSC : FF)
10-24 : 16-35
16-50 : 24-70
18-70 : 28-105
55-200 : 70-300
35 : 50
60 : 90

This post has been edited by lwliam: Sep 2 2011, 11:51 PM

Bro, but 2.6 x 300 = 780mm if my mental calculation doesn't fail me.

Pwns 1.5 x 200 = 300mm any how u see it.

Optical zoom is always better than post cropping.

Congratz! But I'd go for the 85 though.

lenses can last 20-30 years (some even longer), modern camera bodies last at most 3-4 years before getting totally obsolete..

What I meant was when the cameras are in the hands of the owner.

This post has been edited by lwliam: Sep 4 2011, 02:32 AM