New camera, looking for new glass

My new D7000 should be here in a couple days. I'm looking to get a new lens to maybe help my BP photography. I'll be using it mostly for up close BP portraits and the occasional feeding/sales video.

Any suggestions?

what's your price? On a budget, the 50mm f1.8 or little bigger budget, 35mm f1.8 is a steal of a lens for that kind of application.

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-35mm-1-8...nikon+35mm+1.8

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5256/5...2766932e_b.jpg
Took this with a Nikon 50mm f1.8 lens on a d200 (before I got the D7000)

Very nice, that is a steal.

I found out I can get this lens for $200 off with my camera purchase:http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-24-70mm-...ywords=24-70mm

What do you think?

If you can afford that kind of glass, it'll last a life time and is the best on the market. That is what pros use for Full Frame camera goodness. . . would price check it against - www.bhphoto.com

The 24-70 is a great lens pro quality. If you are in that range look at the macro either the 105VR or the fab 60mm The 60 is a 'd' series I am not sure if it is fully functional with a 7000. It is a really good lens however better than the 105 in many ways (yes I own both) I love prime lenses for the speed. I would also look at the 50mm the 1.8 is a great lens the mount (plastic) makes the 1.4 better but that is a fair price jump for the metal mount. The speed is better but at 1.4 it is not as sharp as it is at 1.8 or 2.

I'm seriously considering the 24-70 since I can get $200 off right now. Everywhere seems to have it for $1880, no less. I the like versatility that this lens offers. But for what I'm going to use it for (BP photography, feeding/sales videos) do you think I need the versatility or would I be fine with a macro lens?

For the 60 do you mean this one: http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-60mm-2-8...3885311&sr=8-1?

It'll be great. And for macro I believe she was referring to the 60 2.8D it's an older lens model

What do you guys think of this one Nikon 85mm f/3.5G AF-S DX ED VR Micro Nikkor Lens?

I can get $100 of for purchasing this particular macro. Do you think it could do everything I want it to?

Yes the older one cheaper and seriously sharp. It runs in the 460-400$ range. If you don't need the speed of the 50mm lens this can replace it.

The 24-70 is a great lens but if you are using it primary for snakes you will need a real macro. I love my 60mm but the 105 is also very good. I have never shot the G 60mm I can't say how good it is especially shot side by side. The advantage of the 105 is you are back a bit farther the VR is a stupid feature in a macro as VR systems don't work at short distances. I have my VR off 90% of the time as I only use the 105 as a macro. I also have the 105 DF so I use it for everything but macro (far sharper than the macro.)

I would avoid the DX lens. It is looking more and more like NIKON and Canon are moving away from the DX format there are fewer on the market today than even last year. The FX is starting to be seen in the point and shoot cameras it is the beginning of the end.

I apologize for all these questions. I really appreciate all the input so far. I'm certainly a noob at macro photography but I feel like I'm leaning a lot right now.

Very true what kitedemon said about VR. It's pointless.

I'm been doing research and right now I'm really torn between the 35mm 1.8 and the 60mm 2.8.

Do you know roughly what distance from the subject either of these lenses should be used at?

Also, I have strobes but usually I just shoot in indoor light (decently recessed indoor lighting though), which of these would be better with indoor light?

Personally I would not recommend the 35 1.8 DX lens (dx is the issue by accounts it is a good lens) It close focuses at one foot there is no comparison to the 60 macro that is one inch in life to one inch(1:1) on the sensor. That means a print 24mm by 36mm is life sized anything larger is larger than life. 1:1.6 is the 35 1.8 it is also likely to distort the edges at the closest focus. Again I have not used it so this is a best guess on my part.

Ok, I think I understand closest focus distance. But what would the farthest distance be that I could still take a good photo of my a BP with the 60mm 2.8? About a foot?

And how does that compare to the 105mm?

Depends on what you want typically I shoot at 12-36 inches with the 60mm the 105 gets you farther away with the same size in the image. The 105 is likely better but it is also 2 the price and half the versatility. It is hard to say between the two They both are capable of 1:1 ratio so as far as that goes they are the same. The 60mm you would be inches from the snake and the 105 would be about 12 inches for the same.