Lens Shopping is Frustrating!!!

[Missdaisy]

I recently bought a Nikon D300 (a MAJOR upgrade from my P&S) at the time I got the kit which included a 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6g ED-IF AF-S DX VR lens. The problem is that all of that is like reading a foreign language. I would like to shoot professionally, but I am learning the ropes all on my own. To get to the point I would like to purchase another lens that would be appropriate for weddings. I have tried to research lenses on my own but the information is so scientific, I just need someone to tell me in plain English what lenses do what and why. Cost is not a huge concern, I would like to stick with a Nikon lens, I don't want to go cheap now and have to upgrade later.

Thank you in advance!

 

[AlexColeman]

I would recommend a Nikon 50 1.4.
This lens has a wide aperture allowing you to shoot under low light, and create separation with regards to the subject and the background. The 50 means that it will become a short telephoto on the D300, which you can see by zooming to the marked 50 on your 18-200. Finally it is a prime, meaning you cannot change focal lengths like on the 18-200.

Cost = 100

An option if you have more money to spend, is the 17-55 2.8. This is a little bit slower of a lens, but one of near professional quality, allowing you to shoot in similar conditions, with the convenience of a zoom. The quality is remarkably different then that of the 18-200. The 17-55 is a remarkable improvement.

Cost = 1,100

 

[bdavis]

I would say try a 24-70 f/2.8

 

[AlexColeman]

That would be overkill in my opinion for a D300, because she will definitely miss the wide of that lens, essential for wedding photgraphy.

 

[Sherman Banks]

I would recommend a Nikon 50 1.4.
This lens has a wide aperture allowing you to shoot under low light, and create separation with regards to the subject and the background. The 50 means that it will become a short telephoto on the D300, which you can see by zooming to the marked 50 on your 18-200. Finally it is a prime, meaning you cannot change focal lengths like on the 18-200.

Cost = 100

Where are you finding a 50mm 1.4 for $100?

And I don't shoot weddings, but I imagine a prime lens to be difficult to work with in these settings as you have to always be moving to frame your shots. It seems like a fast zoom lens would be ideal.

 

[AlexColeman]

I apologize, mixed the 1.4 and 1.8 up.

To clarify: 50 1.4 300-400

1.8=100

 

[AlexColeman]

I would recommend a Nikon 50 1.4.
This lens has a wide aperture allowing you to shoot under low light, and create separation with regards to the subject and the background. The 50 means that it will become a short telephoto on the D300, which you can see by zooming to the marked 50 on your 18-200. Finally it is a prime, meaning you cannot change focal lengths like on the 18-200.

Cost = 100

Where are you finding a 50mm 1.4 for $100?

And I don't shoot weddings, but I imagine a prime lens to be difficult to work with in these settings as you have to always be moving to frame your shots. It seems like a fast zoom lens would be ideal.

I just gave her two ideas of the gamuts of the price range. The 1.4 would be more of a detailer lens, not one that stays on the body, but one for the ring, and bouquet.

 

[bigtwinky]

If you are learning things on your own, have a look at "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson. A great read and intro into the world of photography.

18-200mm f/3.5-5.6g ED-IF AF-S DX VR
18-200 = the range of the lens, measured in milimeters. 18 being wide, 200 being telephoto.

f/3.5-5.6 = how wide the aperture can open. f/3.5 is the widest it will go at 18mm and f/5.6 is the widest it will go at 200mm.
If the lens just said f/2.8, that would be a widest of f/2.8 between 18 and 200.

ED-IF AF-S DX VR = you can probably google these, they are specific Nikon terms that identify other things in the lens. I know that VR is Vibration Reduction, which will, in simplest terms, help with camera shake.

For weddings, the below with a constant f/2.8
24-70
17-55
70-200

 

[inTempus]

If you don't know what all those "scientific" things are that describe a lens you're probably no where near ready to shoot a wedding or really ready to buy a new high dollar lens. Those "scientific" things describe the functional capabilities of the lens. If you don't know what they mean, it means you don't know how the lens works or how it should be employed. If you don't know how to use it, why are you buying it?

Learn with your kit lens and when that starts to fail you, you'll know exactly what it is you need in a new lens... and then those "scientific" descriptions will begin to make sense.

I should also mention that shooting weddings will require more than one lens good lens. It will also require more than one body as well.

 

[Sherman Banks]

If you don't know what all those "scientific" things are that describe a lens you're probably no where near ready to shoot a wedding or really ready to buy a new high dollar lens. Those "scientific" things describe the functional capabilities of the lens. If you don't know what they mean, it means you don't know how the lens works or how it should be employed. If you don't know how to use it, why are you buying it?

Learn with your kit lens and when that starts to fail you, you'll know exactly what it is you need in a new lens... and then those "scientific" descriptions will begin to make sense.

I should also mention that shooting weddings will require more than one lens good lens. It will also require more than one body as well.

I was trying to figure out a way to say that nicely so I'm glad you said it first.

The important thing to remember with wedding photography is that if you're not completely familiar with the operation of your camera or the elements of good photography, you will most likely produce some very bad/mediocre results on what some people consider to be the most important day of their lives. It's not a task to be taken lightly as I know firsthand from hiring a crappy wedding photographer (my wife chose her).

 

[DScience]

I would recommend a Nikon 50 1.4.
This lens has a wide aperture allowing you to shoot under low light, and create separation with regards to the subject and the background. The 50 means that it will become a short telephoto on the D300, which you can see by zooming to the marked 50 on your 18-200. Finally it is a prime, meaning you cannot change focal lengths like on the 18-200.

Cost = 100

An option if you have more money to spend, is the 17-55 2.8. This is a little bit slower of a lens, but one of near professional quality, allowing you to shoot in similar conditions, with the convenience of a zoom. The quality is remarkably different then that of the 18-200. The 17-55 is a remarkable improvement.

Cost = 1,100

Will you please show me where I can get a 50mm 1.4 for $100??

 

[DScience]

I should also mention that shooting weddings will require more than one lens good lens. It will also require more than one body as well.

Require is a pretty strong word. Preferred might be the better term.

 

[Josh220]

I would recommend a Nikon 50 1.4.
This lens has a wide aperture allowing you to shoot under low light, and create separation with regards to the subject and the background. The 50 means that it will become a short telephoto on the D300, which you can see by zooming to the marked 50 on your 18-200. Finally it is a prime, meaning you cannot change focal lengths like on the 18-200.

Cost = 100

An option if you have more money to spend, is the 17-55 2.8. This is a little bit slower of a lens, but one of near professional quality, allowing you to shoot in similar conditions, with the convenience of a zoom. The quality is remarkably different then that of the 18-200. The 17-55 is a remarkable improvement.

Cost = 1,100

Will you please show me where I can get a 50mm 1.4 for $100??

Originally Posted by AlexColeman
"I apologize, mixed the 1.4 and 1.8 up.

To clarify: 50 1.4 300-400

1.8=100"

 

[Missdaisy]

Alright looks like you all need a little more background info. I LOVE LOVE LOVE photography, so after many months of saving $ I bought my D300. I knew that I would have to do a lot of reading and practice to understand my camera and the art of photography. I am a hands on learner, so reading manuals and posts online only get me so far, I have to just do it and by trial and error I learn. I do plan on reading "Understanding Exposure" I have seen many people suggest that book.
Back to the wedding, my family has taken notice to my addiction to snapping everyones picture at every opportunity, so my cousin approached me about shooting his wedding Labor Day weekend of 2010, so that gives me 15 months to learn as much as possible. I also had a crappy photographer at my own wedding (we did not get our wedding pics from this phtographer for 6 YEARS) so I am very sensitive to the fact that this is an extremely important job. I am just trying to project the things that I will need to purchase and become familiar with in the meantime.
I know that I need a second body, but I have time to save.
Thank you for your feedback.

 

[kundalini]

I have tried to research lenses on my own but the information is so scientific, I just need someone to tell me in plain English what lenses do what and why.

A couple of things stuck out for me in your words above.

The information you seek is not so much scientific as it is technical. This can be learned with due diligence. If can be overwhemling in the begining. Take it on as if you're eating an elephant. You how to do that, right?......... One mouthful at a time.

With your 18-200, you have a decent range to practice with until you have determined what focal lengths are your "go to" shots. Then, buy the best damn lens you can afford.

For lens reviews, I usually look at these sites first,
photozone.de
thomhogan.com
fredmiranda.com
dpreview.com

Then, I'll go to nikoncafe.com or a few other forums and see if there is information there I can glean.

Cost is not a huge concern, I would like to stick with a Nikon lens, I don't want to go cheap now and have to upgrade later.

:thumbsup: I like seeing comments like that rather than the usual "what's a cheap so and so..." I've only got Nikkor lenses, but there are a few third party lenses that can match or perhaps surpass Nikkor for less money.