Another new lens thread... General Purpose

[DustinB]

Hey guys, I'm fairly new to photography and I am starting to get a little more focused on getting better shots and understanding what makes a good photo. Anyway, I am looking for a better lens than my current kit lens.

Camera: Nikon D90
Current Lenses:
Nikon 18-105 VR Kit Lens
Nikon 35mm F1.8 DX
Tamron 90mm Macro

What I would like is a quality, fast lens. Something that would be good for all around shooting such as walking around to shooting portraits etc... Something I could leave on the camera most of the time. As stated, I am new to photography so I don't shoot any particular thing. Right now I am trying headshot portraits and family portraits, pictures of things around the house, the cats and dogs, etc... Basically working on getting good lighting on several different things and playing around.

I have been looking at several different lenses such as the Nikon 24-70 F2.8, the Tamron 24-70 F2.8, and the Tamron 28-75 F2.8. I am still up in the air as to which is the best option for me and I am completely open to other suggestions including different ranges. I do like what I have seen about the Nikon 24-70 F2.8, but it's kind of difficult to spend that much money on a lens being so new to the hobby, especially considering I just bought an SB-910 flash. The Tamron equivalent seems appealing, but the cost is still a factor given the plastic construction and possible quality control issues.

I hope I gave enough information without rambling, what would you guys do in my situation?

 

[480sparky]

Nikkor 24-70.

 

[shadowlands]

used Nikon AF-S 17-55 F2.8 DX, if you don't mind staying DX for a bit.
They can be had in the $700.00's now.

 

[Rafterman]

I do like what I have seen about the Nikon 24-70 F2.8, but it's kind of difficult to spend that much money on a lens being so new to the hobby, especially considering I just bought an SB-910 flash. The Tamron equivalent seems appealing, but the cost is still a factor given the plastic construction and possible quality control issues.

If cost is that much of a concern, buy the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 instead of the others. You can get it brand new for $475 (after $25 rebate) or used for about $300-350. Unless you're using it to photograph in dangerous, wet, or dusty locations, build quality won't be a factor and I've never heard of it having QC issues. It's a fantastic lens for the money and gets rave reviews anywhere you look. Here's some sample images for your browsing enjoyment.

 

[TheLost]

...
Camera: Nikon D90
Current Lenses:
Nikon 18-105 VR Kit Lens
Nikon 35mm F1.8 DX
Tamron 90mm Macro

...
What I would like is a quality, fast lens. Something that would be good for all around shooting such as walking around to shooting portraits etc... Something I could leave on the camera most of the time.
...

A walk around lens isn't normally a good portrait lens. For a walk around lens you would want a mid-range zoom. On a DX body like the D90 that would be something in the 18-50mm range. For portraits you want something in the 100mm+ range (why? see this... http://stepheneastwood.com/tutorials/lensdistortion/index.htm ).

I would take a look at the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 ($600US)... awesome lens at less then 1/2 the price of the Nikon version.

 

[hirejn]

Since you're just "playing around" and looking for something to leave on the camera, and "working on getting good lighting" and shooting "things around the house," what you have will work. A new lens will not improve your photography. You'll be paying for nice specs, a cool factor and fun, but not better photography.

 

[JDFlood]

I would recommend a 50mm f1.4, if you are serious about walking around shooting portraits. If you are talking more of street photography the 35mm you have is good... Or maybe a 24mm or 28mm. These will have better depth of field. Lots of folks use zooms, many of us over time have gone back to primes. Zooms are less sharp, slower, and tend to make you lazy. Lazy, because you should let the required depth of field make you choose the lens, not how far you are from the subject. Obviously, sports and wildlife are different. Zooms, beg you to stand in the same place, and change the mm to frame... Usually a bad choice. Primes are lighter, and I would argue better to learn on, then I would argue to do really good work with... So my recommendation is, skip the zooms... Except for the 14-24mm, I love that one. JD

 

[JaronRH]

I read your description and the first thing that came to mind was "Jack of all trades; Master of none!". In my mind, the 18-105 is your general purpose, walk around lens. I would now look into a lens that addresses a particular need more then another generic lens. Based off of what you mentioned, I would consider:
- Sigma 17-50 OS. Outside of build quality, I found this to be just as good as the Nikon 17-55 (I used to rent one for weddings) only it is lighter, has VR, and is sharper in the middle. This would cover you for low-lighting, things around the house, and do "ok" portraits on the long end.
- Nikon 85mm 1.8G (or Sigma 85mm HSM). While a little long for indoor use, this would be a stellar portrait lens on your D90 (and would work on an FX camera if you ever upgraded).

I would pass on the 50mm personally. I have a 50 1.8D and found that, while it does pretty good for portraits, the focal length was awkward in that it always seamed to be too wide or to telephoto.

(FYI, I had the same dilemma a few years ago myself and ended up with the Sigma 85mm. Below is with my D90 and Sigma 85mm @ f/1.4)

 

[DustinB]

Thanks for all the info guys. I decided to go with the Nikon 17-55 2.8 used. Now I just need to find a good one for a good price. After reading a bunch I think it should suit the purposes I have in mind for it. At least this way if I decide I don't want it I should be able to sell it for about what I pay for it.

 

[Rafterman]

This...

it's kind of difficult to spend that much money on a lens being so new to the hobby, especially considering I just bought an SB-910 flash.

Contradicts this...

I decided to go with the Nikon 17-55 2.8 used.

Because this...

a good one for a good price.

Means spending $900+

 

[DustinB]

Well the 24-70 f/2.8 is an $1800+ lens. At $900 that would be half the price of the 24-70 new. I have been finding them going for around $750 though.

 

[Patrice]

Thanks for all the info guys. I decided to go with the Nikon 17-55 2.8 used.

Good choice. The mid range DX zoom that other lenses want to be.

Buy it used in good condition and if you take care of it you'll likely get your money back if you ever want to sell it. I bought mine new 6 years ago and sold it 2 years ago for the price I paid less tax.