Lens necessities?

[ShutterSpeed]

I just purchased a Nikon D7000 as an upgrade to my D60.

In order to help me compensate for that purchase, I am selling my D60 with just the kit 18-55mm lens. (have a solid buyer waiting on me to confirm)

So, that leaves me with a 35mm F1.8 prime, 50mm 1.8 prime and a 55-200mm zoom lens.

any suggestions for that lower focal length range? am I in urgent need to replace it?

I was actually thinking for the 18-105mm lens as a replacement. or just a 28mm f2.8 to help cover that lower focal length.

thoughts?

 

[Kerbouchard]

any suggestions for that lower focal length range? am I in urgent need to replace it?

I don't know...how often did you use the 18-55? When you did use it, did you wish it had a bit more reach? If you used it a lot and wish it had more reach, it seems like the 18-105 would be a good choice. If you never used it, you may not need to replace it.

For me, I wouldn't be happy if my widest lens option was 28mm. Have you considered the 16-85?

 

[ShutterSpeed]

I just purchased a Nikon D7000 as an upgrade to my D60.

In order to help me compensate for that purchase, I am selling my D60 with just the kit 18-55mm lens. (have a solid buyer waiting on me to confirm)

So, that leaves me with a 35mm F1.8 prime, 50mm 1.8 prime and a 55-200mm zoom lens.

any suggestions for that lower focal length range? am I in urgent need to replace it?

I was actually thinking for the 18-105mm lens as a replacement. or just a 28mm f2.8 to help cover that lower focal length.

thoughts?

actually...i went through the selling talk tonight..so I haven't looked around much. I did a look through bhphoto and saw the 16-85...so, yes that should be an option.
i actually use the 35mm quite a bit. Love the aperture, but when I've done some events, 35mm is just not wide enough, so I had to use the 18-55mm..but didnt like the lens that much. so good info...16-85..probably good investment.

 

[tyler_h]

Doesn't Nikon have a 16-35 f/4 ??
That takes you right up to your 35 f/1.8 with 24 - 52.5mm equiv which in my mind is a decent walk-around, just pocket the 50 f/1.8 at the same time.

If you were to go another prime I'd say ~20mm because 28 vs 35 (42 vs 52.5 equiv) isn't a lot of difference so you could get away with one and a few steps.

 

[ShutterSpeed]

Doesn't Nikon have a 16-35 f/4 ??
That takes you right up to your 35 f/1.8 with 24 - 52.5mm equiv which in my mind is a decent walk-around, just pocket the 50 f/1.8 at the same time.

If you were to go another prime I'd say ~20mm because 28 vs 35 (42 vs 52.5 equiv) isn't a lot of difference so you could get away with one and a few steps.

i'm not so knowledgeable of lenses, but what makes an f4.0 lens such a valuable lens? i just checked the price, and it was much higher than i'd expect from that f-stop.

 

[Kerbouchard]

It's not just that an f/4 is a valuable aperture, but when a manufacturer goes to the trouble of building a constant aperture lens, they generally pull out all the stops...build quality, distortion, sharpness, lens coatings, focus speed, etc, etc, etc. Nikon has pretty much two speeds. Consumer and Pro. There aren't a lot of middle ground lenses in Nikon's line up. The 70-300 VR and 16-85 VR are probably the closest things Nikon has to a 'middle' lens and neither are a constant aperture.

 

[tyler_h]

Yeah, as Kerbouchard has stated it's all the other factors that aren't directly implied in the naming of the lens that distinguish it as a better lens regardless of similar parameters on paper.

My thought was that if you had just upgraded your body you might like to keep heading on that track and take a large step up from the kit lens. You didn't mention a budget, but a few dollars coming in for your old body/kit lens should help take a little of the sting off.

 

[jdag]

I recently upgraded from a D90 to D7000. When I sold the D90, I also sold the 18-105, which I rarely used. I bought the 24-120 f4, and am thrilled with it.

 

[KmH]

I just purchased a Nikon D7000 as an upgrade to my D60.

In order to help me compensate for that purchase, I am selling my D60 with just the kit 18-55mm lens. (have a solid buyer waiting on me to confirm)

So, that leaves me with a 35mm F1.8 prime, 50mm 1.8 prime and a 55-200mm zoom lens.

any suggestions for that lower focal length range? am I in urgent need to replace it?

I was actually thinking for the 18-105mm lens as a replacement. or just a 28mm f2.8 to help cover that lower focal length.

thoughts?

Yes, and a sweet lens too!.

Nikon 12-24mm f/4G ED IF Autofocus DX Nikkor Zoom Lens

 

[ShutterSpeed]

thanks guys this has all been great feedback...i'll consider these options..

 

[djacobox372]

First, do you really need a lens wider then 35mm? Many photographers can do without a wide angle. Perhaps you only need something a little wider, like a 20mm. Keep in mind that your d7000 is fully compatible with nikons classic manual focus glass--a 20mm f2.8 ais is built better then the newer autofocus version and it's significantly cheaper. A drunk monkey could manual focus a wide angle lens. If u need a wide angle both sigma and tokina make excellent ultra wide zooms for the dx format.If u want something just a bit

 

[tyler_h]

First, do you really need a lens wider then 35mm?

42.45% of my shots are 34mm equiv. or wider haha. It's never been stated what the intended use of the lens in though, and my percent comes from a landscape interest.

 

[Mike_E]

35mm has the FOV of a 52mm, a 28mm equates to a 42mm. The 18-105mm doesn't suck and whatever distortion it has can be dealt with in post.

 

[Jarrod268]

Doesn't Nikon have a 16-35 f/4 ??
That takes you right up to your 35 f/1.8 with 24 - 52.5mm equiv which in my mind is a decent walk-around, just pocket the 50 f/1.8 at the same time.

If you were to go another prime I'd say ~20mm because 28 vs 35 (42 vs 52.5 equiv) isn't a lot of difference so you could get away with one and a few steps.

i'm not so knowledgeable of lenses, but what makes an f4.0 lens such a valuable lens? i just checked the price, and it was much higher than i'd expect from that f-stop.

Its a FX lens, not DX. Its also VRII. I purchased this lens a few weeks ago to go with my D700. Best lens I've owned.

16mm on full frame is like 10mm on a crop sensor camera. Its wide, accepts filters and has VR. Its a good alternative to the 14-24 f2.8 and 17-35 f2.8.... And cheaper.

On a D7000, this lens is effectively a 24-52mm.


Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

 

[KenC]

First, do you really need a lens wider then 35mm?

42.45% of my shots are 34mm equiv. or wider haha. It's never been stated what the intended use of the lens in though, and my percent comes from a landscape interest.

This is the key point in deciding. I have no use for anything wider than 28, and don't use that very much, so everyone's needs are different. Check the file info on the shots you took with the 18-55 to see whether you have many "keepers" taken near the wide end, and if so, whether those could have been taken with a slightly longer focal length, and you'll have answered your own question.