What Nikon lens to buy?

[chaoticstone]

As for zooms basically you get what you pay for. Expensive zooms are great through the range all apertures and focal lengths, Cheaper ones are designed around a single point then bridged to the rest they usually will have a 'sweet spot' where they are really good then as you get farther away from it not so good. Again I have no direct experience with this lens so no comment on that one exactly. I am a bit biased (and a bit old school) I don't use any zooms professionally I have a prime kit, 8mm to 300mm the slowest lens I own is a 2.8 and the fastest a 1.2.

I always recommend the standard 50mm it is fast and sharp and for 150$ hard to match I love the length for fashion I keep an old half frame camera just to use it.
Alex

Wow have to say the full frame/half frame camera thing just went right over my head but I think if it was in my terms your basically saying that the full frame lens will work on both a half frame and full frame but not the other way around? I will trust you and just go with the one you have worked with.

I have to say that I wish I could just get a kit now instead of picking it all out myself since I'm really confused now. Yet since I have to pick my lenses out myself......Say the standard 50mm lens you talked about does it make the camera basically a point and shoot? I'm going to try and explain what I mean better. Say your taking a picture of a bird house in your yard it's 15ft away you snap a picture and it looks 15ft away and you get half the yard? Or you can take a picture of that same object from the same distance away and you get basically just the birdhouse less yard?

[kitedemon]

Oh sorry I hate fly bys...

The sensor in the d90 is half the size of a 35 mm film negative.

What that does is actually fairly simple, hard to explain. I can take a stab at it but Ken Rockwell's isn't too bad so read this. remember lenses project a circle (called an image circle)

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/dx.htm

The upshot is that the FX (d700) sensor is 24x36mm and the DX (D90) is 15.8x23.6, that is a 1.5 difference in size (basically) so a 60mm for FX optically is a 90mm one (60x1.5=90) The advantage is that if nikon moves away from the dx size the FX lens will work (as a 60mm) on a new body where the dx lens forces the body (lets use the d700 a 12MP body with a DX lens is not a 6MP body the 1.5 factor in reverse) to not use the full surface of the bigger sensor.

The kit lenses usually are really crummy at least the ones my students have. The 50mm 'standard' lens is roughly 46 degrees in view which is about what we humans see in concentrated vision (ignore preferal) that is why it is 'normal' that is on a FX camera the DX it is 75mm (50 x1.5+75) about 36 degrees. Which is a short portrait lens (70-135 is typical portrait lenses) It is 'fast' meaning it allows a lot of light to pass though the aperture. 1.8 is 150% more light than 2.8 which is a 'fast zoom' that is a lot more.

sorry off track there. No a 50mm does not make a body a point and shoot that is body setting not optics. It does make a small lighter camera as it isn't a large lens. The easiest is go find a PRO store in your area take your camera with you and ask to see a 60mm macro the 85mm macro and 50mm put them all on your camera and look at what it does. You will see it. Shoot some frames and take them home at look at them and see what you like. Then go back and talk price give them a chance to match the online pricing ask if you buy the macro can they do better on the 50. Usually they can. There is also a huge mark up on bags and soft good like that if they can't beat online ask about adding a bag or something (light tent?) you might want to sweeten the deal.
Read your manual. It will help you understand your camera better. I know it suck to read but it will help.
Alex

[Old Sloppy]

I own a Nikon D90.
I own 3 lenses;
1)35mm f1.8 G very good for low light, still needs a tripod when light is very low.
2)105mm f2.8 G VR2 Micro this is a very good lens for snakes (but costly)
3)18-200mm VR2 zoom a good lens in brighter lighting

the 35mm is about $200
the 105mm is about $1000
the 18-200 is about $800

A D90 is an excellant camera in it's price range....(around $3000 )

A full framed camera is simply out of my budget, but I would if I could.....
D700 is 4 times more costly because lenses are $2000 to $8000 each.......!

Harry

P.S. You will use a tripod a lot ( more than hand held shots).

[kitedemon]

Old Sloppy,
I think you should check your information. The pricing you are talking about is incorrect.

I think you have a typo with the d90 is about 700$

The d700 runs in the $2400 range.
I own 14 nikkor lenses there are a few 5 that are over the 1000$ mark One is over the 2000$ mark but the rest are in the 600$ range. The least expensive was only 160 new.

"D700 is 4 times more costly because lenses are $2000 to $8000 each.......!"

I don't get where this figure came from but it is WAY too high.

I am not advocating a d700 to any amateur it is over kill to be sure. I actually like the 90 a lot.

I usually tell people to spend money on Lenses and not to put so much on the body. With that in mind I usually suggest that the Nikon D series and G series are great but to avoid the DX lenses that cripple the higher end bodies, I believe that in the next few years the DX format will become obsolete like disk film did. I have actually worn out a 60 macro last year (after 16 years of heavy use) and I would question if the DX format will be here in the next 10 years.

[ama1997]

The VR works great, but depends on what your shooting. If your shooting something like sports. Where you need high shutter speeds to freeze motion. The VR can slow down the lens. Also if your worried about hand shake. Learn the proper way to hold you camera, and never shoot lower than the length of your lens. If you using a 70-200mm f 2.8 and your zoomed out to 200. If you have your shutter speed above 1/200th you shouldnt have to much blur from hand movement. If you shooting at 35mm then 1/35th of a sec is as low as you should go.

If your going to be doing marco stuff. Better off getting a somewhat good marco. I use either the 50mm 1.4 Nikon or the 35mm 1.8. None of those are macro. But I can get as close as about a foot with either of them. The 35mm 1.8 is under 200.00 and a great lens for the dx sensor. If your doing marco then your going to need a tripod, when using a tripod you have to turn off the vr or you can get some blurry images. So the VR in a macro In my mind is a waste, unless your going to be using the macro for other stuff too. Dont waste your money on the d90 its on its way out pretty much. Some are saying the d7000 is to replace the d90 and the d300. The high ISO images in the d7000 are right up there with some of the more expensive Nikons.

When looking for lenses. It better to buy good glass instead of bad/cheap. You will just have to replace the cheap stuff down the road once you get more into photography. bodies come and go. You can get a decent cheaper nikon body. Then get good lenses for it. What ever body and lens you decide on. Make sure if the camera doesn't have a built in motor. You get lenses with built in motors. Lenses without built in motors will not auto focus on most lower end nikon camera. lenses with built in motors will auto focus on cameras that have built in motors. Also lower f number means wider aperture, Wider aperture means the lens lets more light in. More light means you can use higher shutter speeds. Same with ISO Think of ISO as film speed 100,200,400,800,1600 and so on. The higher the number the more sensitive the film/sensor is. More sensitive = more light so you can use faster shutter speeds in low light. I have seen very usable images on the d7000 at 3200 ISO. The d5000 and lower 800 ISO in low light is about the highest you can go and get usable images.

If you want a good lens that you can use on other things,not just reptile. That wont empty your bank account. Id check into the 50mm f/1.4 or the 35mm f/1.8 or even the 50mm f/1.8 Also you need to decide if you want video. I think most of the newer nikon d-slr's do video all but the d3000.

If you can try and stay away from the floating aperture lenses. like this one. 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor thats not a bad lens, but not that great for low light shooting. f.3.4-5.6 means at 18mm the max aperture is 3.5 thats not bad. When zoomed out to 55mm the aperture is 5.6. Again that lens is an ok lens its one of the kit lenses. Dont waste you money on the 55-200mm version of that lens. Almost unusable in low light.

So if you can try and get an f/2.8,f/1.8 or an f/1.4 lens. I have noticed on the 50mm 1.4 i does get a little soft when wide open to 1.4 One more thing dont buy from best buy or amazon or even nikon. I get all my stuff from http://www.bhphotovideo.com/ most of the time they have some great deals on used stuff too.

Save some money up, buy good glass, Good glass if taken care of can last a lifetime. Better to buy one great lens, and use if for ten years (or longer) Than to buy five cheap and have to replace them ever year or so. In the long run you will have better lenses, better photos. Longer lasting good quality lenses.

[kitedemon]

ama1997,
I'd agree with every thing you said, I'd just add a word of caution the DX format cripples the full frame cameras. A d700 that shoots at 6 mp and has little crop lines in the centre of the frame is very frustrating.

The rumour mill is speculating that the replacement for the d300s and d7000, will also be full frame. This also follows nikon's pattern of the last ten years. I think that in 6 years all the advanced and professional and likely some the entry will be full frame. Canon also looks to be heading that way too. With this in mind I'd avoid the DX format lens if you are planning on using them for a long time.

VR is a great asset on zooms and on long primes, but on the macro it doesn't work. The manual for the 105mm vr macro says "As the reproduction ratio increases from 1/30x, the effects of vibration reduction gradually decrease." I use this macro and the 60mm macro a lot (usually 4 hours weekly) The lens is great, but if you are shooting anything close the VR is useless and as a 105 mm portrait lens it has quite a flat field and can have a bit of an odd look in some cases. I own the 105mm DC f/2 so I use the macro as a macro and the result is the VR on that lens is off 90% of the time. I use it all the time on the 300 2.8vr and and 500mm 4 vrII. It works really well I have hand held the 300 to a 1/60 with on problems.

I'd recommend the 60mm over the 105mm especially on the DX cameras.

The I'd also recommend the 50mm but the 1.8 is a great lens (but for the stupid plastic mount on the new one, find a used one) But the 1.4d is an awesome lens and on a half frame body one heck of a nice portrait lens! The 35mm F1.4 is great but soft wide open and the price tag is huge, The f2 is just as good and is sharp wide open. That would be my pick.

Zooms are a you get what you pay for lens. But good is lots of cash. Usually i'd say buy what you can afford and what you will use. But look at prime lenses as they can be cheaper with as good or better optics.

[ama1997]

Did you ever figure out what camera you were going to go with?

[redpython]

dx and EF-s lenses are here to stay.

so are crop sensors. they are way cheaper for the manufactures to produce.

i doubt you'll ever see a full frame camera less than $2000 brand new...

ama1997,

The rumour mill is speculating that the replacement for the d300s and d7000, will also be full frame. This also follows nikon's pattern of the last ten years. I think that in 6 years all the advanced and professional and likely some the entry will be full frame. Canon also looks to be heading that way too. With this in mind I'd avoid the DX format lens if you are planning on using them for a long time.

[kitedemon]

Well see I remember back a few years the full frame sensor was too expensive and you would never see it for less than 10000. I guess not, right or wrong the APS (Amateur Photo System oops I forgot they changed the name of that size in 1999, Advanced now...) died once and was resurrected from the dead, I don't have faith the Lazarus format will survive. The pro format is absolutely full frame and the prosumer market is demanding a version too. It may stop there and the entry cameras will be APS sized and it may not that remains to be seen. For ten years the features of the pro cameras in both Nikon and Canon lines have trickled down the line as newer better things became available, it seems odd that that trend would suddenly stop.