I have the Nikon D7000 - now what lenses?

sheepsaymoo · Apr 4, 2013

Howdy!

I just purchased a D7000 (body only) from a good friend who is starting a trek and cannot bring her trusty camera with her. She did want to keep her lenses, however, so I am without anything to shoot with right now.

I'm looking for some advice as to what lenses to get. I just got my tax return back so I had a budget of $1000-1300.

I've been looking on Amazon and Adorama and everything is very overwhelming. I'm not familiar with any of these lenses. I had an Olympus E510 a while ago (I just got the starter kit) and loved having a DSLR until it got stolen, and I've never replaced it. I was, and still am, pretty much a noob when it comes to DSLRs.

I live in Portland, and the weather is constantly crappy (overcast/rainy). I travel a lot, and want something that will a.) take great pictures while I'm moving/what I'm on is moving and b.) a lens that functions well in low light. I'm not too worried about having an amazing zoom capability, but it would be nice. When I did have a camera, I was constantly taking pictures...this isn't just a part time hobby for me. I travel every weekend, and always (always!) take crappy pictures on my iPhone, which makes me sad...because I know that I could have a gorgeous picture blown up to hang on my wall, instead I can set this crappy little one as a profile picture.

Most importantly, I'm hoping I can get something that is weather sealed.

I have been looking at a few lenses...

18-200 f/3.5-5.6 AF-S ED VR II This seems to cover all of my bases and has zoom!

But, then I found this...

17-55 f/2.8 ED-IF AF-S refurbished on Nikon's website for a pretty decent price. However, this would eat up most, if not all, of my budget.

So, this is my question...any other suggestions for other lenses that would meet my needs? Also, would it be worthit to shell out $1,000 for the uber lens?

AaronLLockhart · Apr 4, 2013

PRIMES PRIMES, AND MORE PRIMES:

50mm f/1.8D
https://www.google.com/shopping/pro...a=X&ei=TyReUeagGIva9QTFv4DwBw&ved=0CFkQ8wIwAA

35mm f/1.8G
https://www.google.com/shopping/pro...a=X&ei=lCReUdygFpHK9QTm1IDQBA&ved=0CF8QxBUwAA

85mm f/1.8D
https://www.google.com/shopping/pro...a=X&ei=ySReUfCSNYfM9gTtiIDYDA&ved=0CFoQ8wIwAA

sheepsaymoo · Apr 4, 2013

I was just googling what prime meant when I got your reply! The 50 mm has come up on a LOT of forums on here as well as other sites. I'll have to look into that.

pixmedic · Apr 4, 2013

I have recently gotten more into primes than zooms. I currently have 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, and 180mm. Mostly use the 85 and 180, but i think most people have/use 35mm and 50mm.
Both zooms and primes have their advantages and disadvantages, So you really need to pin down what/how you want to shoot before deciding.

I've recently discovered that there really isnt anything i did with a zoom that i cant do with a prime, given a little extra footwork, and I honestly enjoy shooting with my primes more. Most will fit in the two cargo pockets of my work pants, so carrying a few isnt a problem.

CaptainNapalm · Apr 4, 2013

I have the 18-200 nikkor lens and like it quite a bit. It takes great photos and certainly eliminates the need from constantly changing lenses - so it's very convenient in this regard. However, it's not the best for low light performance. If you want slightly better image quality and better low light performance invest in a few prime lenses (as mentioned above). You will have better image quality and much better low light performance at pretty much the same price, the only expense will be that you'll not have any zoom so changing lenses frequently will be a must. If it were me, I'd likely get the three primes.

Ballistics · Apr 4, 2013

AaronLLockhart said:
PRIMES PRIMES, AND MORE PRIMES:

50mm f/1.8D
https://www.google.com/shopping/product/14316505760466272777?q=50mm%201.8D&hl=en&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.44770516,d.eWU&biw=2560&bih=1248&sa=X&ei=TyReUeagGIva9QTFv4DwBw&ved=0CFkQ8wIwAA

35mm f/1.8G
https://www.google.com/shopping/pro...a=X&ei=lCReUdygFpHK9QTm1IDQBA&ved=0CF8QxBUwAA

85mm f/1.8D
https://www.google.com/shopping/pro...a=X&ei=ySReUfCSNYfM9gTtiIDYDA&ved=0CFoQ8wIwAA

This, except I would recommend the 85mm 1.8G version.

TruckerDave · Apr 4, 2013

I like my 24 and 50 (both "d's). They both work fine on my d7000 and dont really see a need for a 35. Both are about the same size (tiny) and can just slip the other one in my pocket and go.

TATTRAT · Apr 4, 2013

No matter what, the 50mm 1.8 should be a must have. . . do they still call it a nifty fifty when we're talkin' Nikon here? For the price, it is great bang for the buck, I consider it pretty much an obligation purchase.

I am in the prime camp, though it didn't start out that way, and I still have a couple/few zoom lenses. The 35mm is a great walk around prime. The 85mm is as well and great for shooting people, imo.

As for zoom lenses, I have a 28-300 that has treated me very well, in all weather in all conditions, but isn't weather sealed. I think you will find that lenses are more durable then you may think. What kind of weather are you worried about, or shooting conditions? I spent loads of time in Seattle. . .a weather sealed lens was never a concern or worry, I imagine the climate in Portland isn't too far off?

bc_steve · Apr 4, 2013

I'm also a big fan of primes

goodguy · Apr 5, 2013

While being relatively new to photography I will still share what I like and my thoughts.

Do you see yourself ever going into full frame cameras ?

If yes then get only FX lenses, it will save you a future headache of selling all your DX lenses and buying FX.
If you dont see yourself ever going full frame then any lens will work fine on your D7K as long as its AF.

I was in your shooes and I think the best is a mix of zoom lens and prime lens.
I have 24-85mm, 70-210mm and the 50mm 1.8G.
All together these 3 lenses cost me 600$ and I plan on getting one more in the lower zoom (maybe 10-20mm) and hopfully in the future another prime maybe the 35mm or 24mm.

While not as fast as prime lens zoom lenses are very comfortable and easy to work with and I found (especialyy for a non pro user) meet most of my needs in most cases.

pony · Apr 5, 2013

Ballistics said:
AaronLLockhart said:

PRIMES PRIMES, AND MORE PRIMES:

50mm f/1.8D
https://www.google.com/shopping/product/14316505760466272777?q=50mm%201.8D&hl=en&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.44770516,d.eWU&biw=2560&bih=1248&sa=X&ei=TyReUeagGIva9QTFv4DwBw&ved=0CFkQ8wIwAA

35mm f/1.8G
https://www.google.com/shopping/pro...a=X&ei=lCReUdygFpHK9QTm1IDQBA&ved=0CF8QxBUwAA

85mm f/1.8D
https://www.google.com/shopping/pro...a=X&ei=ySReUfCSNYfM9gTtiIDYDA&ved=0CFoQ8wIwAA

Click to expand...

This, except I would recommend the 85mm 1.8G version.

Agreed.
I currently have the D7000 and love my primes. I have the wide angle 12-24/f4 and the 18-200VR which are both fine, but I rarely if ever use them. And I will have no problem parting with them to fund going full frame

The 35mm/1.8 lens seems fine (and is $1500 less than the 1.4), though I like my 50mm/1.4D, and I think if you are going to get the 85mm it is worth getting the 1.4. But on a budget I did like my 85/1.8D

If you had to get only one lens I would say the 50mm/1.4D
So small and so versatile. My 50mm has never let me down.

TheLost · Apr 5, 2013

For your $1000... i would recomend:

Option #1:
Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 (EX DC OS HSM FLD) = $600
Nikon 35mm f/1.8G = $200
Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX VR = $135 refurbished

The Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 is an amazing lens at 1/2 the price of Nikon's version. The 35mm 1.8 is a great low-light prime. The 55-200mm is a 'good' zoom lens when you need the extra reach. The weakness of the 55-200 is its autofocus speed.. for sports/action a better zoom would be Nikons 70-300VR (~$590 new, $400 refurb, $300 used) but its out of your price range.

Option #2:
Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G (ED IF AF-S DX VR II) = $600 refurbished.
Nikon 50mm f/1.8D = $130
Nikon 35mm f/1.8D = $200

The Nikon 18-200mm is a good super zoom. You are giving up quality for convenience. It won't be as sharp as the Sigma 17-50 and has a variable aperture but you wont have to change lenses as often. The 18-200mm is a great travel lens for that reason. When you need sharpness and low light you can pull out the two primes.

If it was me.... I would first just pickup the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 and go from there. Don't spend money on lenses you may never need or want.

yioties · Apr 5, 2013

I have the 50mm 1.8g and am going to splurge on the 85mm 1.8g and the 70-300 vr to complete my set for now

bc_steve · Apr 5, 2013

Nikon 35mm f/1.8D = $200

you must mean the G?

sheepsaymoo · Apr 5, 2013

TheLost said:
For your $1000... i would recomend:

Option #1:
Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 (EX DC OS HSM FLD) = $600
Nikon 35mm f/1.8G = $200
Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX VR = $135 refurbished

The Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 is an amazing lens at 1/2 the price of Nikon's version. The 35mm 1.8 is a great low-light prime. The 55-200mm is a 'good' zoom lens when you need the extra reach. The weakness of the 55-200 is its autofocus speed.. for sports/action a better zoom would be Nikons 70-300VR (~$590 new, $400 refurb, $300 used) but its out of your price range.

Option #2:
Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G (ED IF AF-S DX VR II) = $600 refurbished.
Nikon 50mm f/1.8D = $130
Nikon 35mm f/1.8D = $200

The Nikon 18-200mm is a good super zoom. You are giving up quality for convenience. It won't be as sharp as the Sigma 17-50 and has a variable aperture but you wont have to change lenses as often. The 18-200mm is a great travel lens for that reason. When you need sharpness and low light you can pull out the two primes.

If it was me.... I would first just pickup the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 and go from there. Don't spend money on lenses you may never need or want.

Thanks so much for your list! I am really looking at the 18-200, that seems to be a good lens for the price.

However, I have heard that the Sigma 17-55s autofocus is wonky. I dont want to invest in something that wprks 50% of the time fantadtoc, but so so the rest. Have you had any such experiences?