Taking the plunge on the D90.... Now what lens?!!?!?

[Atlas77]

uhh, bump?

 

[FmrVette]

Okay, this is my last thread on "what equipment to get".

Not likely :lmao:.

Im taking the plunge on a used D90 body yet I still have so much confusion on which lens to get. Im on a tight budget here, used is fine. Im looking for an "all-around use lens" something I can use for everything until I buy my second lens.

Inexpensive lenses in my kit:

I shoot a D300 and my 'cheap walkabout' lens is a refurbed Nikon 18-135. No VR, not the fastest lens in the kit, but the range is useful and it was $229 from B&H with a warranty.

I have a Sigma 18-125 bought new from Amazon for $209. The Nikon is better, the Sigma resides on my D70S.

Nikon 70-300 G. Much maligned in reviews, I find that used with support (tripod, bean bag, etc.) that it's a reasonable lens for zoo shots, etc. at the long range. At the short range it can be hand held w/o issue. No VR of course but I picked it up from B&H for $125 brand new.

Nikon 50 mm 1.8 - sharp, inexpensive, only issue is that with the DX crop the view (please, NO comments arguing field of view, crop values, zoom, etc., that's old news) it gives a 75 mm result. Sometimes there isn't enough room to back up and get the shot. Paid $120 new.

Nikon 35 mm 1.8 - returns the view of the "normal" 50 mm lens did on film SLR. Bought new for $199. Nice, sharp, low weight.

After that the prices in my kit are all above the $400 mark, which I assume is more than you'd care to spend at the moment.

From the lenses in my kit listed above - the Nikon 18-135 would be the one I'd choose if I had to pick only one to shoot with. Not the range of the 70-300, not the speed of the 35mm, not the sharpness of the 50mm, it's a reasonable compromise lens.

I did own, for about a year, a Nikon 18-200 zoom; sold it to help finance my 70-200 2.8. The 18-200 served well, my copy had no lens creep. If you can find a used 18-200 in your price range you might consider that - although they are a bit soft and are slow.

HTH

 

[Atlas77]

So you say go with a 18-135/18-105 and find a good deal on ebay?

I really dont like telephoto lenses, simply because I would have no use for one. why would I buy one with a huge focal length thats twice as heavy when i know im not gonna zoom is all the way?

Anyways, my main dilema is the 50mm f/1.8. Its cheap its sharp/produces wonderful bokeh but i cant use it everywhere like a 18-135.

Grrr I just want a sharp all use lens until I can buy the 50mm and use both!

And yeah, I max out around 400$ if you would like to show off your lenses go ahead! haha.


And I was even thinking to make another thread because no one is responding!

 

[PhotoXopher]

After going through a lot of lenses over the last year I decided on the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 ($360) and the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 ($1200).

Although I don't have the 80-200 yet, I'm finally confident that I'll have a pair of lenses that, for the most part, will ensure my abilities aren't limited by my lens choice.

Quick test shot from my new 18-50 Sigma, such a fun lens:

 

[Atlas77]

Might be purchasing a used Nikon 18-70mm of a fellow tpf member. Then getting the 50mm 1.8 later on

thoughts?

 

[dhilberg]

I totally agree with NOYZE on the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8. Excellent lens and priced right.

 

[FmrVette]

So you say go with a 18-135/18-105 and find a good deal on ebay?

Anyways, my main dilema is the 50mm f/1.8. Its cheap its sharp/produces wonderful bokeh but i cant use it everywhere like a 18-135.

Grrr I just want a sharp all use lens until I can buy the 50mm and use both!

And yeah, I max out around 400$ if you would like to show off your lenses go ahead!

B&H has an 18-105 VR for $279; you can find 'em for less. I went with the 18-135 because VR isn't all that much to me at that focal length and I wanted the extra range. The 18-105 gets better reviews, may be a tad sharper.

EBay currently has a 50 mm 1.8 with a top bid of $35, three hours left in the auction. From what I've seen they go for right around 90-100 bucks used. (Part of the issue is that they aren't expensive new, they're good lenses - so everyone buys one, tosses in their bag, and rarely sells 'em off). This isn't a recommendation for EBay - I prefer B&H or Adorama, other's mileage may vary.

You should be able to get (used) an 18-105 or 18-135 and a 50 mm 1.8 and stay under $400.

Not much in my kit to show off, I'm afraid, I only own 8 lenses total, along with a Nikon 1.7 teleconverter for the 70-200. I wanted to list out lenses under $300 with which I've had recent experience which might give you some assistance in choosing gear.

Of course it's more in the photographer than the lenses - I've a friend that sometimes borrows lenses from me, and her photos are always better than the ones I take with the same lens. And she uses a D80.

 

[ANDS!]

EBay currently has a 50 mm 1.8 with a top bid of $35

Most likely an E-series; manual focus only. Need to watch out for those.

OP if you want reviews on folks who own the lenses you are looking for, as well as alternatives check out Fred Miranda's lens reviews. Great resource for (slightly) unbiased lens reviews across all platforms.

 

[Atlas77]

your right ands, I already searched ebay. Most of the inexpensive 50mm's are the E series.

I wish I could get a sigma 18-50 yet its too much money, Ive been looking used yet nothing comes up.