http://www.nikonchat.com/nikkor-leica/
What is the equivalent of the best digital SLR lens point and shoot?
I would like to upgrade to digital SLR, but then to buy a body (D80) you only need about $ 250 to spend on a target. I have read many reviews of the cheaper models and they all seem have a lot of negative, whether the slow, distortion, dispersion, CA or softness. So I wonder if the SLR lenses are cheap compared shit SLR lenses with good or are crap compared to the lens point and shoot well. Also, what would be the cheapest Nikon (Nikkor, Tarmon, Sigma …) lens is to beat the best point and shoot lenses like Carl Zeiss Sony, Panasonic and Leica.
Depends on what you buy. I am proud to be able to find great deals at low prices … the rough so to speak. I have been able to get shots of less expensive lenses that have made people do a double take when have heard what lens I used. They have a good knowledge of photography to be used effectively, and it will take some time to know what their stengths and weakness are the following. Some examples that have a Nikon D50, Nikon and N90s. Tamron 28-200mm f/3.8-5.6. $ 150 – $ 180 The first SLR I bought. Acting in the film and digital. It is not as contrasting or claw in the area of color in some objectives, but all that can be adjusted by setting the camera color or further processing. This is my walk through the lens. Thios is solidly built and has never failed me in the 3 years I've had. It's a bit slow for sports or indoor shots -. Phoenix 100mm f/3.5 macro 1:01 $ 100 $ 130 I wanted a macro lens, and really wanted the Tamron 90mm macro, yet they could not afford. Does this place and is a gem for the price. Not in the same league as the Tamron 90mm, but definitely viable, useful and capable of good shots. This building is a little less than desired, but it definitely works. Most reviews of this objective are favorable for a macro in this price range. Nikkor 50 mm f / 1,8 $ 100 Ask any person, either Nikon or Canon, and has had or has made a 50mm f / 1.8 f / 1.4 or purse. This is a versatile lens. punchy, high contrast and fast! There are very few if none of the disadvantages of this goal. For Nikon … I think the f / 1.8 is the best value ($ 100). The f / 1.4 at $ 250 alone does not justify the extra $ 150 for extra stop of light. Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 $ 400 I just got to fall in love with Tamron lenses. Fit the bill for me and the type of shooting I do and in a great price. A comparable Nikon lens in this range will cost $ 800 – $ 850! It isvery strong (about 50 mm f / 1.8) very good in low light. I use it for shooting indoors and sports events. Shot a lot of martial arts tournaments and at the same time I love the 50mm f / 1.8, it is sometimes very tight action and no backup far enough. The constant f / 2.8 throughout the range of 17-50mm is very good for me in this scenario. It is a good compromise of work. Any of these lenses are above a Camera Lens S & P. Now, do not forget that there are more things in the chambers. SLR may tend to be a little less clear because they're trying to do it all on camera in its default configuration. Most people who use a digital SLR camera will post-process your images. All the softness, the saturation may increase made after the fact. You can also make the camera too. You only need to change the factory settings to be as you're looking for. Any consumer-oriented camera (Advanced P & S P & S will be set up to find the best camera because most people who use them are little or no further processing and printing the images "as is" memory card. Camera manufacturers know and what the camera settings accordingly. Hope this helps.
Leica III
Nikon News