new lens advice

[tom.ganc]

Hi
I'm quite new here. I bought Nikon D40 recently and I want to get some new lens. I have kit 18-55mm and I'm thinking about 55-200mm or 70-300mm. I need to decide between Nikon and Sigma lenses. I know that ideal will be Nikon 70-300mm AF-S VR but it costs
I will use it to do portrait shots mainly.
Could you advice me please.
Thanks
Tom

 

[151proof]

Im new on here as well and interested in those same lenses too! So any info would be great, thanks guys...

 

[ChickenFriedRyce]

You would NOT want a 70-300 to do poratraits.

For the D40, the choices are very limited for it has not AF Motor.

Your only other choice would be to find an HSM Lens of Manually focus.

There is a Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 HSM. That's really great for portraits.
It can replace your kit lens too.

 

[jols]

for portraits what about the nifty fifty


nikon 50mm f1.8 for under 100 pounds

 

[tom.ganc]

You would NOT want a 70-300 to do poratraits.

For the D40, the choices are very limited for it has not AF Motor.

Your only other choice would be to find an HSM Lens of Manually focus.

There is a Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 HSM. That's really great for portraits.
It can replace your kit lens too.

Hi
The reason that I want to use 70-300mm for portraits is that I want to get background out of focus. Also havein 300mm lens it is nice for any close ups.
Tom

 

[jols]

nifty fifty will put your backgroud out of focus easy

 

[tom.ganc]

nifty fifty will put your backgroud out of focus easy

Hi
It is nice lens but.....
Is it going to autofocus on my D40? Because it looks like not

Tom

 

[Mav]

50mm is on the short side for portrait photos, especially if you want tighter head shots. There's nothing wrong with the 55-200 or 70-300 Nikon lenses for portraits. Specifically for portraits I'd probably give the 55-200VR the nod because from what I've seen it has slightly nicer out of focus area rendering (bokeh) than the 70-300VR does and is cheaper. 200mm is plenty for most portrait shots, and you'll still be able to yank the background out of focus nicely even though it's only an f/5.6 lens. A longer focal length focused at close distances like for a portrait will still yield a very tight depth of field.

For a one-lens solution, I love the Nikon 18-135mm lens. It has outstanding performance in the 105-135mm range for portraits, and the bokeh on this one is also nice and neutral and non-distracting for the most part, unlike just about all of the other kit lenses. You can find 18-135 lenses for around $200 used if you look around from people discarding them from their D80 and D300 kits.

 

[tom.ganc]

Thank's for your help. I think I'll be getting nikon 55-200mm VR lens. It is cheap enough and it should do the job.

But what would you say about sigma 55-200mm f4/5.6?

Thanks
Tom

 

[Mav]

I'd say the Nikon is probably better optically, is known to have decent bokeh which is important for portraits, has VR, and that it's probably worth the extra $100. If that's a bit much, I'd get the non-VR Nikon 55-200 which is the same price or cheaper.