Nikon Users - Please Suggest Lenses

[forddna]

I mostly play around with the stock kit lens. I bought my D50 intending to learn how to use it, looked into classes, but never found anything that fit my needs, and gave up. So I mostly shoot with the kit lens in Auto mode.

That said, I'd like to upgrade from my kit lens. All I want is something that is newb friendly, AF, and more zoom than the 55mm stock lens. Doesn't need to be super zoom..maybe 100mm.

My second request would be a macro lens. Same kind of deal..user/newb friendly.

I want good quality - something that I won't end up wanting to replace later on. I'm not "into" photography - I'm not artistic enough and I know it. So, if it suits my needs now, I will probably not "outgrow it." But I do like to take photos, and I like them to come out as nice as I can get them to.

Thanks!

 

[nickb]

You have a range of options. The new 18-105mm VR is quite popular. Around $300 and includes vibration reduction to reduce camera shake a slow shutter speeds. It is the main kit lens with the new D90. The 18-200mm would give you more zoom but the price is a lot higher ($600). It has been quite popular as a 'walk-around' lens. Another step up in quality would be the 16-85mm VR (around $500). Less zoom but a better quality lens. There are also lens by Sigma and Tamron and Tokina which many people like.

In terms of macro, you could just get a set of close-up lens or bellows attachments and use your current lens. If you want a special macro lens, something around 100mm is a common starting point. There are three excellent options around $400-500: Tamron 90, Tokina 100 and Sigma 105. Any of those would be an excellent lens.

You might want to check out this site There is lots of discussion about Nikon equipment.

 

[Jar*Head]

As a newb i bought the old school Nikon Micro 105mm f2.8 Ai-S lens off ebay for $275 and it work very well with my D-90 except it doesn't AF. The lens originally has max magnification of 1:2 ratio but if you add the tube and reverse ring you can turn it into 1:1 ratio

 

[reefman77]

for macro lenses the sigma 105 is great. i dont know if it autofocuses on the d50 but in my experience macro focusing is actualy easyer in manual focus.

 

[gjh289]

I'm also looking for a macro for my D70 so I'll be following along. Not to hijack this thread but I have had my camera for about two years now do I need to have any maintenance done?

 

[forddna]

You guys are right about the focus on a macro. I don't care if it has auto focus or not on the macro lens, but I would prefer to have the option of manual focus. Is that common in lenses? To be able to do either?

 

[forddna]

Also, what am I looking for in a lens for trying to shoot fish in my tank? Do you guys typically shoot in the action/running man mode for that, or do you all do everything manually? I'd love to be able to put in the proper mode, and attach the proper lens, and come out with clear pictures.

 

[Slakker]

All lenses should give you the option to manual focus...I don't think I've ever seen or heard of a lens that was exclusively af.

I have a point and shoot, and I do everything manually. I'd imagine most of the folks with DSLRs are using manual settings most of the time, as well. You're going to get the best results if you learn how the settings will affect your photographs and figure out how to adjust them to get the desired effect. It's all part of the learning process

Start out in "Aperture Priority" shooting and just play around with different f/stops and see how it changes the picture.

 

[Jar*Head]

Here is my first few macro shot with Nikon D90 and Nikon 105mm f2.8 Ai-S lens

 

[Jar*Head]

Not the best but you will have the idea of how well the micro lens work even with a newb...

 

[jthao]

18-200mm vr is a good all around lense

 

[forddna]

Is the D90 kit lens a quality upgrade from my D50 kit lens, or would I only be gaining the extra zoom?

 

[nickb]

Which kit lens do you have: the 18-55 (without VR)?

The VR is a useful addition in the 18-105VR. Users seem to rate it as a better lens than the 18-55 (non-VR). It also has a better sharpness profile.

You can find lab tests and some user comments about these lens here:

18-55 (non-VR): http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/130/cat/13

18-55 (VR): http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1154/cat/13

18-105: http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1221/cat/13

 

[forddna]

I would guess that mine is non VR. Thanks for the links!

 

[maroun.c]

18-200 VR although a graet travel and everyday use lens, would not be the best for aquarium photography unless you have a very wide tank. The minimum focusing distance on it requires me to back off from the front glass of the tank which causes flash to reflect more on the front glass and does not allow me to support the camera on the front glass when taking pictures something I really like to be able to do to gain more stability.
One other thing is that focusing speed is not the best especiacially when your near the minimum focusing distance which is a struggle (at least for me) I prefer using my Tamron 17-50 2.8 which focuses muc closer and fast enough as it's a 2.8
I find myslef using the 50 mm limit on it most of the time in tank shots. so maybe going to the 18-105 or the 16-85 would be better choices if they can focus close and faste nough? Still have to check their max aperture.
Another good choice althogh a bit limiting being a fixed lens is the 50mm 1.8 (around 100 usd) or better yet the 50 mm 1.4 (tripple the price) which I own. Using this lense when I have time and patiente and not looking for hte ease of a zoom, I get the sharpest pictures of all lenses I have.
Also the 50 mm is a great lense for use with extension tubes, and reversing rings... oreven to be used reversed over a 105 macro.

 

[edandsandy]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13817600#post13817600 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by nickb
You have a range of options. The new 18-105mm VR is quite popular. Around $300 and includes vibration reduction to reduce camera shake a slow shutter speeds. It is the main kit lens with the new D90. The 18-200mm would give you more zoom but the price is a lot higher ($600). It has been quite popular as a 'walk-around' lens. Another step up in quality would be the 16-85mm VR (around $500). Less zoom but a better quality lens. There are also lens by Sigma and Tamron and Tokina which many people like.

In terms of macro, you could just get a set of close-up lens or bellows attachments and use your current lens. If you want a special macro lens, something around 100mm is a common starting point. There are three excellent options around $400-500: Tamron 90, Tokina 100 and Sigma 105. Any of those would be an excellent lens.

You might want to check out this site There is lots of discussion about Nikon equipment.

This is a GREAT site!
thanks for the suggestions!

 

[forddna]

maroun, thank you!!! Is there any particular lens you would recommend that could be bought, new or used, for under $200? I know that's not much to spend for a good lens, but I don't need anything super fancy...just good quality for what it is.

 

[forddna]

Or...another options. I know Canon and Nikon make some nice P&S cameras. Is there a PnS camera that will take good fish pics? And FTS? I'm a bit more flexible on price for that. I can work something into a Christmas gift.

Then I can save the D50 for killer macro shots when I get a good macro lens??

 

[maroun.c]

As you already have the D50 then getting a P&S would be a waste of money (IMHO) yes it would be convenient to have a small camera wherever you go hidden in your shirt but then they still have shutter lag that is quite annoying, slow focus expecially under low light, most P&S have higher noise levels at ISO higher than 400... Basically I would also have a P&S but that would be after I have hte lens collection I have in mind not before.
Your D50 is famous for high Iso low noise performance which might help you if you don't go with a faster lens.
I would still suggest the same lenses I mentioned above.
The 50 mm 1.8 sells for less than 100 usd
The tamron 50 mm 2.8 can be found around 300 new and might be in your price range if you find it used.
the 18-105 Vr also looks to be a good lense (didn't tryit myself yet)
As to saving for a macro lens eventhough that is a must have for aquarium shots I don't really think its the optimal thing for fish shots as for tank use a 105 mm nikon Vr (or Tamron 90 or Sigma 105 ) are usually the best choice and those might also be too long for fish shots. so with a macro lens you will still need a zoom for fish shots.
What things other than your tank do you shoot frequently. If you are interested in people photography and especially portraits then the 50 mm would be a nice choice. If you don't like to use flash or would like to delay it till you have more money for it then the 50mm 1.8 would be a nice choice. If you do lots of scenery shots then maybe the 17-50 Tamron or maybe the equivalent in Sigma (guess it's the 17-55 in sigma) would be a wise choice as these bet the 18-200 and other kit lenses in terms of distortion and speed being 2.8
What kit lense tdo you have is it the 18-50 or 18-70?
The 18-70 is reported to be sharper than the 18-50 and many people stick to it? Still I prefer to have the 17-50 2.0 Tamron which is classified to be a pro lense in the tamron lineup. Some people even claim it's equally as sharp as the 17-55 Nikon wide open (which IMO is a bit overestimated but maybe true if my lense is a bit softer at 2.8 still much sharper than the 18-200 18-50 18-70 or 18-105)
The VRoption is very important and I rely on it a lot at times however if your subject is moving it will not freeze its motion and there a faster lense has the advantage.
If you can tell us more about what types of photography you see yourself doing you might get better help in terms of lense choice.

 

[maroun.c]

One last thing when you say not a superzoom mentioning a 100 mm lense remember that on your crop sensor it acts as a 150mm zoom and that is quite a zoom.