Wide angle lens help

emt123

TPF Noob!
Joined
Oct 20, 2016
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Definitely a noob here so I apologize in advance for asking what is probably a really basic question.

I've been using an old 35mm slr for a few years. I'm now planning to upgrade to a Nikon D5300 in the next month or so. Buying from Amazon. It comes with an 18-140 lens. The main reason I'm diving into the DSLR world is to capture some awesome snowboarding shots of friends and myself. I'd like to get really crisp pictures of the rider and also a wide view of the background (trees, mountains, lodge, etc)

My question is, what are my options with wide angle lenses? I don't want that really distorted fish eye view. I see some "wide angle" lenses on Amazon that appear to thread onto the kit lense...are those legit? Or am I going to need to drop thousands on something else? As a beginner it's hard to wrap my brain around spending more money on a lense than I spent on the camera. I know you get what you pay for and I'm willing to go there, just seeing what my options are first. Thanks in advance! -Steve
 
You don't need to drop "thousands" to get started, although screw-on auxiliary lenses aren't worth it.

The 18mm end of the 18-140 will provide you with the equivalent of roughly 28mm in 35mm format. A bit wider would be a 16mm lens which would be the equivalent of 24mm in 35mm. The 16mm is about the maximum wide angle before distortion starts (not always that noticeable).

At the long end, your 140mm will be the equivalent of about 210mm, the bare minimum for medium telephoto length. You'll be surprised just how small the images will be at the 140mm end. Of course, a lot depends on just how close you can get (or want to get) to the snowboarders.

B&H Photo shows the D5300, with 18-55mm and 55-300mm lenses for $946. That's a lot of camera and lenses for under $1K. At the 300mm end, you're getting nearly 450mm worth of 35mm coverage. The kit is a great start, and you could add a wider lens a little later.

Nikon D5300 DSLR Camera with 18-55mm and 55-300mm Lenses 13488
 
I see some "wide angle" lenses on Amazon that appear to thread onto the kit lense...are those legit?
No, don't get that. They are like putting "glasses" on the front of your lens. The 18-140 lens is good just the way it is. Put a cheap piece of glass on the front and you would spoil the output.
 
Thanks for the info! I heard the 18-140 is the best kit lense for that camera. Can you guys recommend me a wide lense that's compatable with the d5300 that won't break the bank? I guess a 16 is the size I need (according to Pendennis) that won't give me a distorted fish eye effect. Thanks guys
 
Does the D5300 feature decent AF?

If not a wide angle in sports shall be used prefocussed MF, possibly with focus trap, so think about getting an MF lens.

BUT. When wide angle is your goal, why waste money on a DX body?

You can pickup a used Nikon D3 in decent condition for 8oo Bucks. She shoots 9 fps with AF and was designed as a sports cam from the very beginning.
 
Does the D5300 feature decent AF?

If not a wide angle in sports shall be used prefocussed MF, possibly with focus trap, so think about getting an MF lens.

BUT. When wide angle is your goal, why waste money on a DX body?

You can pickup a used Nikon D3 in decent condition for 8oo Bucks. She shoots 9 fps with AF and was designed as a sports cam from the very beginning.

I'm honestly not sure... I'm a noob. I was steered towards the d5300 from a few YouTube videos saying it's the best bang for your buck for an entry level DSLR.
 
I'm honestly not sure... I'm a noob. I was steered towards the d5300 from a few YouTube videos saying it's the best bang for your buck for an entry level DSLR.

What do you mean by "noob"? Do you mean you have never taken a photo in your life and want to do sports shots now?

If that is the case you should really think about buying a used Porsche like the D3 than a new Fiat like the D5300.

Learning you must a lot anyway ... motivated you are hopefully, young padawan? Then everything is fine.

If you just start, a new Porsche like the D500 with grip and a 10-24DX Nikkor or a new Bugatti Veyron like the D5 & 14-24/2.8 would be too much of a stretch.
 
I'm honestly not sure... I'm a noob. I was steered towards the d5300 from a few YouTube videos saying it's the best bang for your buck for an entry level DSLR.

What do you mean by "noob"? Do you mean you have never taken a photo in your life and want to do sports shots now?

If that is the case you should really think about buying a used Porsche like the D3 than a new Fiat like the D5300.

Learning you must a lot anyway ... motivated you are hopefully, young padawan? Then everything is fine.

If you just start, a new Porsche like the D500 with grip and a 10-24DX Nikkor or a new Bugatti Veyron like the D5 & 14-24/2.8 would be too much of a stretch.

Yea, I'm pretty new. I've used an older 35mm slr off and on for a few years, without ever changing lenses or modifying it in any way. I can barely shoot in manual mode. That's why I'm getting the DSLR. I can run through different shutter, aperture, and ISO settings and get instant feedback so hopefully I'll learn faster. And for the things I want to do like: snowboard photography, night sky, landscape... it seems like everyone is rocking a wide angle lens. There's just so many options, I really just need someone to say hey, here's a few wide angle lens options for under $1000.
 
I'm honestly not sure... I'm a noob. I was steered towards the d5300 from a few YouTube videos saying it's the best bang for your buck for an entry level DSLR.

What do you mean by "noob"? Do you mean you have never taken a photo in your life and want to do sports shots now?

If that is the case you should really think about buying a used Porsche like the D3 than a new Fiat like the D5300.

Learning you must a lot anyway ... motivated you are hopefully, young padawan? Then everything is fine.

If you just start, a new Porsche like the D500 with grip and a 10-24DX Nikkor or a new Bugatti Veyron like the D5 & 14-24/2.8 would be too much of a stretch.

Yea, I'm pretty new. I've used an older 35mm slr off and on for a few years, without ever changing lenses or modifying it in any way. I can barely shoot in manual mode. That's why I'm getting the DSLR. I can run through different shutter, aperture, and ISO settings and get instant feedback so hopefully I'll learn faster. And for the things I want to do like: snowboard photography, night sky, landscape... it seems like everyone is rocking a wide angle lens. There's just so many options, I really just need someone to say hey, here's a few wide angle lens options for under $1000.
When it comes to Wideangle, the look of an image changes dramatically with (almost) every mm of focal length. While you won't feel much of a difference between a 50mm lens and a 70mm lens, there is a huge difference between 16mm and 24mm. The wider you get, the bigger those differences are. But be prepared, if you want your snowboarding friends to fill the frame nicely, you need to get really close.
That said, is there any specific look you want to achieve, do you have any sample images (link) that you really like? We might be able to tell you what focal length you need.
Regarding distortion: true, Distortion starts to become visible at 16mm (24mm full frame). But that doesn't mean you automatically get that fisheye effect. That is made by dedicated lenses. There is a huge difference between a 15mm fisheye, and a 16mm wideangle lens (both speaking full frame).

Another thing to consider: you mention landscapes. In my opinion, you absolutely have to get a polarizer filter. Not every really wide wideangle lens has a thread that enables you to attach one. Make sure to check before you buy.

I do like the idea of buying a used top sports camera like the D3. However, you are able to get decent wideangle lenses for DX bodies nowadays, so wideangle would not be the reason why I'd go fullframe. There are other great reasons though, like shallow depth.
 
I'm honestly not sure... I'm a noob. I was steered towards the d5300 from a few YouTube videos saying it's the best bang for your buck for an entry level DSLR.

What do you mean by "noob"? Do you mean you have never taken a photo in your life and want to do sports shots now?

If that is the case you should really think about buying a used Porsche like the D3 than a new Fiat like the D5300.

Learning you must a lot anyway ... motivated you are hopefully, young padawan? Then everything is fine.

If you just start, a new Porsche like the D500 with grip and a 10-24DX Nikkor or a new Bugatti Veyron like the D5 & 14-24/2.8 would be too much of a stretch.

Yea, I'm pretty new. I've used an older 35mm slr off and on for a few years, without ever changing lenses or modifying it in any way. I can barely shoot in manual mode. That's why I'm getting the DSLR. I can run through different shutter, aperture, and ISO settings and get instant feedback so hopefully I'll learn faster. And for the things I want to do like: snowboard photography, night sky, landscape... it seems like everyone is rocking a wide angle lens. There's just so many options, I really just need someone to say hey, here's a few wide angle lens options for under $1000.
When it comes to Wideangle, the look of an image changes dramatically with (almost) every mm of focal length. While you won't feel much of a difference between a 50mm lens and a 70mm lens, there is a huge difference between 16mm and 24mm. The wider you get, the bigger those differences are. But be prepared, if you want your snowboarding friends to fill the frame nicely, you need to get really close.
That said, is there any specific look you want to achieve, do you have any sample images (link) that you really like? We might be able to tell you what focal length you need.
Regarding distortion: true, Distortion starts to become visible at 16mm (24mm full frame). But that doesn't mean you automatically get that fisheye effect. That is made by dedicated lenses. There is a huge difference between a 15mm fisheye, and a 16mm wideangle lens (both speaking full frame).

Another thing to consider: you mention landscapes. In my opinion, you absolutely have to get a polarizer filter. Not every really wide wideangle lens has a thread that enables you to attach one. Make sure to check before you buy.

I do like the idea of buying a used top sports camera like the D3. However, you are able to get decent wideangle lenses for DX bodies nowadays, so wideangle would not be the reason why I'd go fullframe. There are other great reasons though, like shallow depth.

Thanks for the info!
I'm honestly not sure... I'm a noob. I was steered towards the d5300 from a few YouTube videos saying it's the best bang for your buck for an entry level DSLR.

What do you mean by "noob"? Do you mean you have never taken a photo in your life and want to do sports shots now?

If that is the case you should really think about buying a used Porsche like the D3 than a new Fiat like the D5300.

Learning you must a lot anyway ... motivated you are hopefully, young padawan? Then everything is fine.

If you just start, a new Porsche like the D500 with grip and a 10-24DX Nikkor or a new Bugatti Veyron like the D5 & 14-24/2.8 would be too much of a stretch.

Yea, I'm pretty new. I've used an older 35mm slr off and on for a few years, without ever changing lenses or modifying it in any way. I can barely shoot in manual mode. That's why I'm getting the DSLR. I can run through different shutter, aperture, and ISO settings and get instant feedback so hopefully I'll learn faster. And for the things I want to do like: snowboard photography, night sky, landscape... it seems like everyone is rocking a wide angle lens. There's just so many options, I really just need someone to say hey, here's a few wide angle lens options for under $1000.
When it comes to Wideangle, the look of an image changes dramatically with (almost) every mm of focal length. While you won't feel much of a difference between a 50mm lens and a 70mm lens, there is a huge difference between 16mm and 24mm. The wider you get, the bigger those differences are. But be prepared, if you want your snowboarding friends to fill the frame nicely, you need to get really close.
That said, is there any specific look you want to achieve, do you have any sample images (link) that you really like? We might be able to tell you what focal length you need.
Regarding distortion: true, Distortion starts to become visible at 16mm (24mm full frame). But that doesn't mean you automatically get that fisheye effect. That is made by dedicated lenses. There is a huge difference between a 15mm fisheye, and a 16mm wideangle lens (both speaking full frame).

Another thing to consider: you mention landscapes. In my opinion, you absolutely have to get a polarizer filter. Not every really wide wideangle lens has a thread that enables you to attach one. Make sure to check before you buy.

I do like the idea of buying a used top sports camera like the D3. However, you are able to get decent wideangle lenses for DX bodies nowadays, so wideangle would not be the reason why I'd go fullframe. There are other great reasons though, like shallow depth.

Thanks for the reply! Here's a shot I'd really like to recreate

Photography Tips: Getting the Perfect Ski Shot - REI Co-op Journal

4th picture down, just below the section in bold titled "give direction"

Is that a wide angle lense or could I pull that off with the 18-140 kit lense?
 
I'm honestly not sure... I'm a noob. I was steered towards the d5300 from a few YouTube videos saying it's the best bang for your buck for an entry level DSLR.

What do you mean by "noob"? Do you mean you have never taken a photo in your life and want to do sports shots now?

If that is the case you should really think about buying a used Porsche like the D3 than a new Fiat like the D5300.

Learning you must a lot anyway ... motivated you are hopefully, young padawan? Then everything is fine.

If you just start, a new Porsche like the D500 with grip and a 10-24DX Nikkor or a new Bugatti Veyron like the D5 & 14-24/2.8 would be too much of a stretch.

Yea, I'm pretty new. I've used an older 35mm slr off and on for a few years, without ever changing lenses or modifying it in any way. I can barely shoot in manual mode. That's why I'm getting the DSLR. I can run through different shutter, aperture, and ISO settings and get instant feedback so hopefully I'll learn faster. And for the things I want to do like: snowboard photography, night sky, landscape... it seems like everyone is rocking a wide angle lens. There's just so many options, I really just need someone to say hey, here's a few wide angle lens options for under $1000.
When it comes to Wideangle, the look of an image changes dramatically with (almost) every mm of focal length. While you won't feel much of a difference between a 50mm lens and a 70mm lens, there is a huge difference between 16mm and 24mm. The wider you get, the bigger those differences are. But be prepared, if you want your snowboarding friends to fill the frame nicely, you need to get really close.
That said, is there any specific look you want to achieve, do you have any sample images (link) that you really like? We might be able to tell you what focal length you need.
Regarding distortion: true, Distortion starts to become visible at 16mm (24mm full frame). But that doesn't mean you automatically get that fisheye effect. That is made by dedicated lenses. There is a huge difference between a 15mm fisheye, and a 16mm wideangle lens (both speaking full frame).

Another thing to consider: you mention landscapes. In my opinion, you absolutely have to get a polarizer filter. Not every really wide wideangle lens has a thread that enables you to attach one. Make sure to check before you buy.

I do like the idea of buying a used top sports camera like the D3. However, you are able to get decent wideangle lenses for DX bodies nowadays, so wideangle would not be the reason why I'd go fullframe. There are other great reasons though, like shallow depth.

Thanks for the info!
I'm honestly not sure... I'm a noob. I was steered towards the d5300 from a few YouTube videos saying it's the best bang for your buck for an entry level DSLR.

What do you mean by "noob"? Do you mean you have never taken a photo in your life and want to do sports shots now?

If that is the case you should really think about buying a used Porsche like the D3 than a new Fiat like the D5300.

Learning you must a lot anyway ... motivated you are hopefully, young padawan? Then everything is fine.

If you just start, a new Porsche like the D500 with grip and a 10-24DX Nikkor or a new Bugatti Veyron like the D5 & 14-24/2.8 would be too much of a stretch.

Yea, I'm pretty new. I've used an older 35mm slr off and on for a few years, without ever changing lenses or modifying it in any way. I can barely shoot in manual mode. That's why I'm getting the DSLR. I can run through different shutter, aperture, and ISO settings and get instant feedback so hopefully I'll learn faster. And for the things I want to do like: snowboard photography, night sky, landscape... it seems like everyone is rocking a wide angle lens. There's just so many options, I really just need someone to say hey, here's a few wide angle lens options for under $1000.
When it comes to Wideangle, the look of an image changes dramatically with (almost) every mm of focal length. While you won't feel much of a difference between a 50mm lens and a 70mm lens, there is a huge difference between 16mm and 24mm. The wider you get, the bigger those differences are. But be prepared, if you want your snowboarding friends to fill the frame nicely, you need to get really close.
That said, is there any specific look you want to achieve, do you have any sample images (link) that you really like? We might be able to tell you what focal length you need.
Regarding distortion: true, Distortion starts to become visible at 16mm (24mm full frame). But that doesn't mean you automatically get that fisheye effect. That is made by dedicated lenses. There is a huge difference between a 15mm fisheye, and a 16mm wideangle lens (both speaking full frame).

Another thing to consider: you mention landscapes. In my opinion, you absolutely have to get a polarizer filter. Not every really wide wideangle lens has a thread that enables you to attach one. Make sure to check before you buy.

I do like the idea of buying a used top sports camera like the D3. However, you are able to get decent wideangle lenses for DX bodies nowadays, so wideangle would not be the reason why I'd go fullframe. There are other great reasons though, like shallow depth.

Thanks for the reply! Here's a shot I'd really like to recreate

Photography Tips: Getting the Perfect Ski Shot - REI Co-op Journal

4th picture down, just below the section in bold titled "give direction"

Is that a wide angle lense or could I pull that off with the 18-140 kit lense?

I took a look at the exif data. That image was shot with the 14-24mm f2.8 lens at 14mm.
BUT: it doesn´t look nearly that wide to my eye. I think the photographer cropped the image pretty much, so the perceived focal length is somewhere near 24mm I´d say. I´m curious to what others would suggest.

BTW: did you know that you can create a sun-star, stopping down the aperture to about f16-22? That will create a cool effect, I particularely love that for skiing shots. But it comes with a drawback: you loose light and therefore shutter speed, plus a little sharpness from diffraction (if you are interested in diffraction, here is a short comparison of different f-stops - I´ve created that years ago to showcase diffraction).
 
[/QUOTE]

I took a look at the exif data. That image was shot with the 14-24mm f2.8 lens at 14mm.
BUT: it doesn´t look nearly that wide to my eye. I think the photographer cropped the image pretty much, so the perceived focal length is somewhere near 24mm I´d say. I´m curious to what others would suggest.

BTW: did you know that you can create a sun-star, stopping down the aperture to about f16-22? That will create a cool effect, I particularely love that for skiing shots. But it comes with a drawback: you loose light and therefore shutter speed, plus a little sharpness from diffraction (if you are interested in diffraction, here is a short comparison of different f-stops - I´ve created that years ago to showcase diffraction).[/QUOTE]

Awesome! Didn't know you could pull that info out of that photo. Can you recommend a 14-24 f2.8 lense? Is auto focus an option?
 
I took a look at the exif data. That image was shot with the 14-24mm f2.8 lens at 14mm.
BUT: it doesn´t look nearly that wide to my eye. I think the photographer cropped the image pretty much, so the perceived focal length is somewhere near 24mm I´d say. I´m curious to what others would suggest.

BTW: did you know that you can create a sun-star, stopping down the aperture to about f16-22? That will create a cool effect, I particularely love that for skiing shots. But it comes with a drawback: you loose light and therefore shutter speed, plus a little sharpness from diffraction (if you are interested in diffraction, here is a short comparison of different f-stops - I´ve created that years ago to showcase diffraction).

Awesome! Didn't know you could pull that info out of that photo. Can you recommend a 14-24 f2.8 lense? Is auto focus an option?
here's that 14-24/2.8 lens ==> Nikon 14-24mm
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top