Advice needed for beginner

[fjrabon]

You can get the D3200, D5100 and D7000 either body only, with the 18-55mm, or with the 18-105mm lens.

Not sure what you want to know about memory cards ... get one ?

I simply got me a 32gb for my D5100 and use it since then.

One thing is that a lot of photographers generally prefer several smaller cards to one large card. The reason being that if you lose a 64 GB card A) it's expensive and B) you've lost a LOT of pictures. You should probably have at least 3-4 extra cards in your bag anyway, and even if you shoot RAW + JPEG fine (which I dont advise, just shoot RAW only), four 8GB cards should be more than enough. Also, the same total size broken into multiple memory cards is usually cheaper (or at least no more expensive) than one single gigantic memory card. ie, you will usually save money buying 4 16GB cards as opposed to 1 64 GB card.

 

[SCraig]

It depends on how and what you shoot as far as the other zooms go. Also, always remember that if you shoot well enough and sharp enough, you can (more or less) crop a 35mm into a 100mm anyway. But I'm not a telephoto fan to begin with. I almost never use mine. So take that for what you will.

Most of the posts in this thread have commented on how short lenses will leave you looking for more reach and how longer lenses will leave you looking for more width. This is about the only one that touched on the truth: YOU have to decide what YOU want to shoot. These aren't bridge cameras with 30x lens range. If you plan to shoot up close you will need a wide angle lens. If you plan to shoot subjects at a distance you are going to need a telephoto lens. There is not one lens that will do everything.

With an APS-C sensor camera the 35mm lens is considered to be a "Normal" lens in that it approximates the vision of the human eye. If you want wider angle then get below 35mm. If you want more magnification get above 35mm.

I am the opposite of fjrabon though. I'm not a wide angle fan and seldom use mine except when I'm inside. The majority of what I shoot is at 150mm or longer.

 

[Solarflare]

[...] There is not one lens that will do everything. [...]

Well ... there is, but its expensive, heavy, and picture quality wise its not that great: Nikkor AF-S DX 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR II.

 

[fjrabon]

[...] There is not one lens that will do everything. [...]

Well ... there is, but its expensive, heavy, and picture quality wise its not that great: Nikkor AF-S DX 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR II.

ha, though 18-200 still isn't everything. I do a lot of shooting between 10-18mm. and if you shoot wildlife you'll quickly want more than 200mm.

 

[SCraig]

ha, though 18-200 still isn't everything. I do a lot of shooting between 10-18mm. and if you shoot wildlife you'll quickly want more than 200mm.

Precisely. As I said most of my shooting STARTS at 150mm and goes up from there. For a lot of shots I really like the reach of my Sigma 150-500 and would be lost without it. A 200 is nowhere near long enough for my purposes.

 

[Solarflare]

[...] There is not one lens that will do everything. [...]

Well ... there is, but its expensive, heavy, and picture quality wise its not that great: Nikkor AF-S DX 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR II.

ha, though 18-200 still isn't everything. I do a lot of shooting between 10-18mm. and if you shoot wildlife you'll quickly want more than 200mm.

I am aware. Also, no macro. But still - thats a 10x zoom like you get it for many compact cameras.

 

[Alan92RTTT]

I want to be able to get as much focal range from my choice of lenses without much overlapping.

Nothing wrong with a bit of overlap.

I will stand my my recommendation of the 18-105.

Yes, the 18-55 is inexpensive but it is a starter lens and you will outgrow. You stated you are looking at the D7000 now(I want one) their is a reason that the 18-105 is offered as the kit lens on that body. Its the better option long term.

I'm going to make a suggestion, stop worrying about lens selection at this point. Get the 18-105 and don't worry about anything else right now. Get the camera and take the time to learn the camera. Learn what you like to shoot and what you feel the need for. Then start slowly researching lenses to let you take the pics you wanted but could not with the 18-105. You don't need to have a full lens selection on the day you get the camera.

 

[fjrabon]

I want to be able to get as much focal range from my choice of lenses without much overlapping.

Nothing wrong with a bit of overlap.

I will stand my my recommendation of the 18-105.

Yes, the 18-55 is inexpensive but it is a starter lens and you will outgrow. You stated you are looking at the D7000 now(I want one) their is a reason that the 18-105 is offered as the kit lens on that body. Its the better option long term.

I'm going to make a suggestion, stop worrying about lens selection at this point. Get the 18-105 and don't worry about anything else right now. Get the camera and take the time to learn the camera. Learn what you like to shoot and what you feel the need for. Then start slowly researching lenses to let you take the pics you wanted but could not with the 18-105. You don't need to have a full lens selection on the day you get the camera.

Image quality wise, the 18-55mm is just as good as the 18-105mm. The reason it's included as the kit lens for the D7000 is because it's a wider zoom range, which is easier for salesmen to sell to people buying their first dSLR (which is the majority or people who buy a body with a kit lens). "But if you step up to the D7000, not only are you getting a better camera, but your lens can zoom up to 10X! You can get all those awesome pictures of humming birds from the comfort of your back porch, even through a screen!"

 

[Alan92RTTT]

My point is that its more versatile. You may not see this as you prefer taking wider angle images.

This is the OP's 1st DSLR having a more versatile lens would be of benefit till he can find what he needs to fill his needs.

 

[gryffinwings]

My point is that its more versatile. You may not see this as you prefer taking wider angle images. This is the OP's 1st DSLR having a more versatile lens would be of benefit till he can find what he needs to fill his needs.

I agree with this.

 

[fjrabon]

My point is that its more versatile. You may not see this as you prefer taking wider angle images.

This is the OP's 1st DSLR having a more versatile lens would be of benefit till he can find what he needs to fill his needs.

I understand that, I am just making it clear that it's not a 'better' lens. Most people 'outgrow' the 18-105mm lens quickly as well if they're serious about photography. It's not a bad lens by any means, but for serious photographers it's just too limited. It takes very good pictures between about 35mm and 70mm and between f/8 and f/11.

If anything most photographers tend to go from a single 'do everything' lens, to several specialized lenses as they grow as photographers, whereas your previous statement sort of implied that the reverse is true, by saying that the OP would quickly 'grow out' of the 18-55mm and would be better served in the long term with the 18-105mm.

I think a good zoom with a wide range is good when you very first start (or two zooms that cover a wide range), because it gives you an idea of how you want to shoot. But as you gain a better understanding of how you shoot, do everything lenses like the 18-105mm become near useless for anything other than family vacations.

In fact, going from a beginner to intermediate, one of the first things experienced photographers will advise is putting the super zoom away, and really nailing down a couple of focal lengths, and really understanding how aperture changes your shots. You can't really do that on the 18-105mm (or the 18-55mm either)

I think we ultimately agree, but from seeing a lot of these threads around here, I know that most people in the OP's situation would have taken the post I originally responded to from you as meaning "get the 18-105mm, it's better quality" which I know you didn't say, but that is how many would take it, and I just wanted to clear up that it is not in fact a better quality lens than the 18-55mm, it can just shoot at more focal lengths.

edit: I say all this as somebody who demo'd the 18-105mm from a friend who was trying to unload it. I had it for a month, and I just never found any use for it. It wasn't a bad lens, but it doesn't do anything particularly well, which is the case for almost all zooms with a wide range of focal lengths, unless you're shelling out MEGA dollars.

 

[Alan92RTTT]

I use the 18-105 as my walk-around, vacation general use lens. This is a use that IMO the 18-55 fails at.

As I grow as a photographer I will get more specialized lenses(ie the 35mm 1.8) but I see myself using the 18-105 in that walk-around/vacation role for a long time.

 

[moonrad]

Hi again!

Thank you very much for all your comments, you're all definitely giving me a lot to think about.

My shooting preference is very varied. I like taking shots with friends and family (indoors and out), landscape shots, close up (macro) shots, I like taking textures for stock images for photoshop and also like nature shots.

The reason I asked about memory cards is as I haven't used a DSLR before, I don't know how the different class cards compare to each other. I.E. how much better would a class 10 card be to a class 6? I'm looking at getting a few cards to give me plenty of space, probably 16Gb cards.

Thanks again.

 

[Alan92RTTT]

I use 4gb class 4's in my D5000. That gives me about 250-300 raw images per card. I have 2 4gb and two older 2gb as backups.

Given your shot preference if varied I'd suggest the 18-105 to start. Its a decent Jack-of-all trades lens that you can use to get your feet wet.

 

[Rwsphotos]

You can get the D3200, D5100 and D7000 either body only, with the 18-55mm, or with the 18-105mm lens.

Not sure what you want to know about memory cards ... get one ?

I simply got me a 32gb for my D5100 and use it since then.

One thing is that a lot of photographers generally prefer several smaller cards to one large card. The reason being that if you lose a 64 GB card A) it's expensive and B) you've lost a LOT of pictures. You should probably have at least 3-4 extra cards in your bag anyway, and even if you shoot RAW + JPEG fine (which I dont advise, just shoot RAW only), four 8GB cards should be more than enough. Also, the same total size broken into multiple memory cards is usually cheaper (or at least no more expensive) than one single gigantic memory card. ie, you will usually save money buying 4 16GB cards as opposed to 1 64 GB card.

I would add the higher the class of card the faster the write speed. I run class 10 cards but it is up to you how fast you want your camera to record.