Choosing Lenses!

[InfiniteRes]

I have finally decided to upgrade from my Olympus C770 to a better camera. All of these years, all of the places I have traveled to, have resulted in mediocre quality images. The grandeur of Rome, the Majestic mountains of northern Italy....so many opportunities missed due to my camera. Whether it would not focus fast enough, or because I did not possess high enough quality zoom, so many shots were lost. But no more! I will now forgo a new graphics card in exchange for a good camera and lens (s).

I was considering the Nikon D90. I am pretty set on that camera....due to many things, notably the film function (I like to take videos and pictures in tangent to better capture my location). So unless you guys really think that it is not a good camera, I will go onto what I am a little overwhelmed over, the lens! After looking through the Nikon website for hours I am still unsure what I should buy. It is a hard choice because 1. I am very picky when it comes to anything auditory or visual 2. I am not rich 3. I take a considerable number of very close up pictures [plants, etc...] 4. I take many telephoto shots [If they can be called that....long distance shots] 5. I do not have perfectly steady hands 6. I often go through harsh environments [-20 to 120]. So considering these.....what lens (s) would you suggest? My maximum budget for lenses after the camera is around $700....and that is the ABSOLUTE MAX....I would prefer to go below $500 though so that I can eat. And if you think that I might require something better.....I might consider sacrificing 2-3 months of future income for the cause.

So...here is what I am thinking. I would ideally have an all rounder. I was looking at the AF-S DX VR Zoom-NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED. It looks good to me, although, it seems to have gotten many bad reviews, many complaining about distortion that should not exist in a lens of its price range. The next one I found was the 55-200mm VR ED lens. I was thinking about using this one alone.....though I have never dealt with separate lenses before, so I am not sure what the base 55mm will look like. From what I can tell, it will be by default "zoomed in"....which will be a problem when trying to take landscape shots and indoor shots where I want to be "as far back" as possible. Along with that, it received, like anything else under $500, multiple negative reviews...which although were from picky professionals, still dissuade me from buying it.

I really don't know......what do you guys suggest? I would like to buy this by tommorow, as I am going on a trip soon and want to have a better camera by then.

Thanks.
http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-N...VR-Zoom-NIKKOR-55-200mm-f%2F4-5.6G-IF-ED.html

 

[InfiniteRes]

I was thinking.......I think that 200mm is equivalent to the 10x zoom on my Olympus. Really.....the full 10x shots I take are pretty rare....and anything above that through the use of digital zoom is almost always for amusement. Here in LA there are many, many obstructions. You cannot get by with a fixed zoom lens...unless you want cars and power lines in your image. I would say on average I use 5x zoom...just to crop the image and get all of the obstructions out of the way. In fact, it almost might be possible to get away with a fixed 5x...or maybe 100mm lense. Though, there are numbers of times, such as when I am indoors, or when I cannot back up enough, where I need to be "put farther back". I think something like the Nikon 24-120 ED VR would suite my needs well. It received good reviews too........but what to do about the 5% of the time when I need over 120mm.......there is the 70-300mm ED VR...though combined I would have to pay a pretty penny....more then I can afford. Maybe I should buy the 24-120ED off the bat, and get the 70-300 later on? But then again...although they will not be as ideal at first due to the lesser zoom, there is the 16-85mm ED VR and the 18-70 ED...both of which have advantages over the 24-120. But there is something I noticed with the 70-300mm...it seems that it is not in the correct format for the D90, and that that will create an apparent zoom. First off, is that detrimental? Also, how much is this zoom? Will it create too large of a gap between the lower zoom lens and it? If you do not consider that effect, I have either no gap with the 18-70, or an over zoom with the 16-85; can that 15mm compensate for this? If not....in your opinion, how much will having a gap in the zoom hurt me? Between the 16-85 and the 18-70, which one is better overall? Can certain conditions make either one better?

 

[benhasajeep]

Of course the 18-200 lens is a jack of all trades type so its not expected to give absolutely correct pictures, for techniphobes its an issue. But for the normal person, its a great lens. You will not be sorry for the D90 and lens.

There are other that are less expensive. I myself am considering the Tamron 18-270. I know it has limitations, but I only want to carry 1 lens. And it will be just fine for me. Not going to be making poster prints from the files anyway. So it will be just fine. Its a bit less than the Nikon with a larger range. I just want it for travel.