Which Lens Next??

[mickeysmate65]

Before I start baking my lemon meringue pie, I thought I'd pop on & ask for some advice. I've lurked for a long time and am always amazed at the beautiful shots posted by everyone. Now it's time to ask for some advice ....

I've had a Nikon D50 for many years and am finally taking the time to learn the camera beyond the auto settings. I've been reading up on exposure and can actually shoot in manual when I want now! I like my D50 & would love to move up but really want to be proficient with the manual settings first.

Right now I have two basic lenses: The AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm (kit lens) and AF-S Nikkor 55 - 200mm. I tend to use the 55-200mm lens the most because I like tight/close-up shots. One thing I notice from the pics posted here is the depth & detail - I want that!!

Could you recommend a good, moderate priced lens that would give me what I'm looking for? How do you know that a lens is "good" other than taking pics with it? Also, would the lenses for the D50 be compatible with future Nikon cameras? I'd hate to spend a lot of money on lenses then not be able to use them in the future.

Thanks for all of your help. Happy holiday!
Kathie

 

[Kevitivity]

Before I start baking my lemon meringue pie, I thought I'd pop on & ask for some advice. I've lurked for a long time and am always amazed at the beautiful shots posted by everyone. Now it's time to ask for some advice ....

I've had a Nikon D50 for many years and am finally taking the time to learn the camera beyond the auto settings. I've been reading up on exposure and can actually shoot in manual when I want now! I like my D50 & would love to move up but really want to be proficient with the manual settings first.

Right now I have two basic lenses: The AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm (kit lens) and AF-S Nikkor 55 - 200mm. I tend to use the 55-200mm lens the most because I like tight/close-up shots. One thing I notice from the pics posted here is the depth & detail - I want that!!

Could you recommend a good, moderate priced lens that would give me what I'm looking for? How do you know that a lens is "good" other than taking pics with it? Also, would the lenses for the D50 be compatible with future Nikon cameras? I'd hate to spend a lot of money on lenses then not be able to use them in the future.

Thanks for all of your help. Happy holiday!
Kathie

Consider getting a fast prime lens, like a 35mm or everyone's favorite 50mm. Using a prime can help tech you about framing and composition. And if it's a fast prime you will be able to get a lot of good indoor shots using natural light.

 

[ukcatfan]

I agree

 

[handicap18]

I've started moving up to f/2.8 lenses. I am currently using the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 for my "general purpose" lens. Next up, I'd love to have the 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII, but thats out of my price range at this point, so maybe the Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8.

If you don't have a prime lens then the 50mm f/1.8 is great with the D50 at about $120. Another good option is the Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 at about $190. Especially if you plan on going to Disney any time soon or like taking lots of candids or low light shots or like you said, you want that shallow depth of field look.

Any lens you buy for the D50 will be able to use with any other Nikon slr. The only issue would be if you go to a "lower" level or a newer entry level Nikon. The newer entry level Nikons (D40, D60, D3000, D5000 for example) don't have a focus motor in the camera. The D50 is the last "entry level" Nikon that does have the focus motor in the camera so it can use AF or AF-S lenses. AF-S designated lenses will work on any camera as they have the focus motor in the lens (AF lenses don't have the focus motor in the lens and therefor need to have the camera body to have a focus motor in order to auto focus). DX designated lenses are for the "crop" lenses and while they will fit on the FX bodies, they will have serious vignitting issues. But then again, right now the FX bodies start at about $2400.

Hope that helps.

 

[e6bflyer]

Santa just brought me a Nikon AF-S 35mm 1.8 for my Nikon D40. After much research I decided it was the best bang for my buck at $200. The AF-S 50 1.4 is around $350 and the AF 50mm 1.8 is $129 but I didn't want to mess with manual focusing or the higher price for the AF-S lens.

After playing with the lens yesterday, I am very happy with it and it works wonderful in this low light that Washington State gives us.

 

[PhotographyDR]

Totally agree with the f1.8 primes and the f2.8 zooms. I picked up the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 ($699) and love it. Tack sharp, short DOF. The only other suggestion is to go Ultra wide. Since you have the 18 - 200 range covered this might give you an extra range. The Tokina 11-16 f2.8 ($599) is a nice lens. Difficult to find sometime but take great shots. Both will upgrade nicely if you get a different body.

 

[mom2rtk]

Are there any 2.8 zooms for Canon that start at 18?

 

[mickeysmate65]

Thank you to everyone who responded! I'm checking out all of the suggestions but haven't decided just yet. One thing is certain - I'm not good with manual focus. I wear glasses and frequently find it hard to tell if I'm in focus! I probably won't buy until after January 1st so keep the suggestions coming.

One thought: Could someone post sample pics with those lens already suggested? Preferably without post-processing so I can get a feel for the differences.

Just thought of something else: Would someone explain the difference between a f1.4, f1.8 and f2.8 lens? I think I understand but want to be sure I'm on the right track.

Thanks again!
Kathie

 

[disneyboy2003]

Just thought of something else: Would someone explain the difference between a f1.4, f1.8 and f2.8 lens? I think I understand but want to be sure I'm on the right track.

Each f-number represents the aperture, which is the size of the opening that allows light into the lens and into the camera. A smaller f-number represents a larger aperture.

A lens with f/1.4 lets in almost 2x more light into the camera as f/1.8. In photography terms, we say that it's about 1 stop (or, 1 f-stop) difference. A lens with f/1.8 lets in a little more than 2x more light into the camera as f/2.8.

That also means that a lens with f/1.4 lets in 4x more light than f/2.8.

Because large-aperture lenses let in more light into the camera, one of the advantages is that it lets you use faster shutter speeds to achieve a particular exposure. Sports photographers love this and take advantage of this.

Large aperture lenses are also good for low-light photography. Wedding photographers and concert photographers will also look for these lenses.

When you have large apertures, you'll get a very blurry background. This is known as "bokeh". This can be a very good thing, and portrait photographers really look for lenses that produce a pleasing bokeh. If you look at portrait photography, you'll notice that the subject is in focus, and the background is usually somewhat blurry. This helps to separate your foreground subject out from the (possibly distracting) background.

A couple disadvantages of large aperture lenses. First, if you're looking for a zoom lens that has a large aperture, be prepared to shell out $$$$$. For example, a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens usually runs about $1700 - $2000(!). On the other hand, prime lenses (ie. fixed focal length, non-zoom) are a little more affordable.

Second, when you take photos at f/1.4, for example, your depth of focus is very very small (perhaps millimeters). For example, if you focus on your subject's eyes, their nose might be out of focus. Or if you're taking a picture of 2 people standing right next to each other, 1 might be in focus, while the other will be a little out-of-focus. The solution would be to adjust your aperture down to f/1.8, f/2.8, f/4, etc as best you can to keep your entire subject(s) in focus.

Hope that helps.

 

[e6bflyer]

I took these with my AF-S 35mm 1.8 lens with my Nikon D40. I am very pleased with it. These have not been edited.

My first shot with the lens. Buddy our elf.

My dd, always ready to smile.

Leaving yummy salted caramel doughnut for santa.

The girls here are trying to take a pic of me.

 

[disneyboy2003]

Are there any 2.8 zooms for Canon that start at 18?

Yes! There is a Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 lens that is very highly recommended and gets great reviews. It costs almost exactly $1000. It's an EF-S lens, which means it won't work on full-frame Canon DSLRs (ie. Canon 5D, Canon 1D, etc).

Here's the link to B&H for this lens: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&N=0&Q=&Ntt=CA175528IS*&A=endecaSearch

 

[C&B Young]

Are there any 2.8 zooms for Canon that start at 18?

The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is highly regarded, and it comes in a Canon mount. And best of all it goes for a price-friendly $450 at B&H . It's on my wishlist to replace my kit lens.

 

[disneyboy2003]

The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is highly regarded, and it comes in a Canon mount. And best of all it goes for a price-friendly $450 at B&H . It's on my wishlist to replace my kit lens.

Cool!

The only thing this Tamron lens doesn't have is Image Stabilization. That may partially explain the huge price difference compared to the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 lens.

 

[boBQuincy]

Are there any 2.8 zooms for Canon that start at 18?

There is also the Canon 16-35, a very fine lens (for about $1500).

 

[Groucho]

Also the Tokina 16-50mm, reportedly the same optically as the Pentax 16-50mm which I have (and it's excellent.) I'm pretty sure there's a Sigma too, but I think the Tamron tends to win overall in the price vs performance equation.

 

[PhotographyDR]

There is actually one I forgot. Lensbaby. If you are unfamiliar with this lens check out the Web Site. I have one and love it.

It is basically a "selective focus" lens. It gives a vignette but not a light vignette but rather a focus vignette. It is a manual lens in the truest sense as it is manual focus as well as manual aperture. The great thing about these lenses is that they are less expensive to start and you can expand them quite easily. You can make a macro, wide angle, telephoto, fisheye, etc. from the same base lens. I use the composer model and it has gotten a lot of creative juices going. My favorite part of the lens is the manual aperture rings you put in it to control light. You can use different shapes to cause background "point lights" to take the shape of the aperture ring. I have taken some using a "mickey" shape and it really turned out great. Until I can post a photo (rules of the dis boards) you can seem them on the Flickr page.

 

[PhotographyDR]

Each f-number represents the aperture, which is the size of the opening that allows light into the lens and into the camera. A smaller f-number represents a larger aperture.

A lens with f/1.4 lets in almost 2x more light into the camera as f/1.8. In photography terms, we say that it's about 1 stop (or, 1 f-stop) difference. A lens with f/1.8 lets in a little more than 2x more light into the camera as f/2.8.

That also means that a lens with f/1.4 lets in 4x more light than f/2.8.

Because large-aperture lenses let in more light into the camera, one of the advantages is that it lets you use faster shutter speeds to achieve a particular exposure. Sports photographers love this and take advantage of this.

Large aperture lenses are also good for low-light photography. Wedding photographers and concert photographers will also look for these lenses.

When you have large apertures, you'll get a very blurry background. This is known as "bokeh". This can be a very good thing, and portrait photographers really look for lenses that produce a pleasing bokeh. If you look at portrait photography, you'll notice that the subject is in focus, and the background is usually somewhat blurry. This helps to separate your foreground subject out from the (possibly distracting) background.

A couple disadvantages of large aperture lenses. First, if you're looking for a zoom lens that has a large aperture, be prepared to shell out $$$$$. For example, a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens usually runs about $1700 - $2000(!). On the other hand, prime lenses (ie. fixed focal length, non-zoom) are a little more affordable.

Second, when you take photos at f/1.4, for example, your depth of focus is very very small (perhaps millimeters). For example, if you focus on your subject's eyes, their nose might be out of focus. Or if you're taking a picture of 2 people standing right next to each other, 1 might be in focus, while the other will be a little out-of-focus. The solution would be to adjust your aperture down to f/1.8, f/2.8, f/4, etc as best you can to keep your entire subject(s) in focus.

Hope that helps.

One thing I wanted to add to the F-number question is that the number is actually a math formula. (Don't worry not a bad one). The f number is the focal length / diameter of the aperture ring. But everything said above is true but if you think about it in terms of the formula it makes a little more sense.

 

[C&B Young]

Cool!

The only thing this Tamron lens doesn't have is Image Stabilization. That may partially explain the huge price difference compared to the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 lens.

Tamron does make a vibration compensation version of the lens which goes for about $200 more, but I was just reading a discussion of the lens on another board that says the VC version isn't as sharp as the non-VC. Some testing here seems to confirm it. Why does lens shopping need to be so hard? On the bright side, it'll be at least a year before I'm ready to make a purchase and I'm sure everything will have changed by then anyways!

 

[Sunshineanddaisys]

Like the OP I was looking to add on another lens....I have a similar set up...though I have a D5000 and not the D50, I also have the same lenses as the OP (18-55mm and 55-200mm).

Based on some of the comments on this thread and others, I went ahead and picked up the 35mm thats been talked about.

I love it so far...The picture below is one that I took with the lens in a darkened room, with the blinds drawn....(excuse the subject matter, Miss Kitty was the only available model at the time lol )

 

[mickeysmate65]

Wow! Thank you to everyone who responded. I'll re-read the info & let you know which lens I decide to order - Most likely it will be the 35mm/f1.8. Hopefully it will be my birthday gift this month!