need some glass for my new camera(d80)

[Mooseontheloose]

edit: Now need a telephoto, advice welcome, see last post.

Well after many years intending to buy a dslr, I've finally done it. I just got a nikon d80 off of ebay but its the body only. With the money left over I have approx 200 to buy a cheap lens. I shoot all types of things from landscape, sports to a lot of night photography, but I know I can't get any lens suitable for all of that in this price range. I may just wait off on a sports lens for a while so that I can get a decent 70-200 later. So for an initial walk around lens, I was looking at the nikkor 50mm 1.8. I was also debating whether or not just to get the kit lens, but if I did that I might as well have gotten it as a package. But, basically I don't know much about lenses, so I'm asking you guys. I'm sure theres been loads of threads like this before, but hey.. you clicked on it! Thanks.

 

[TJ K]

For walk around if I were you I would pick up the 35 1.8 and it's 200 so it meets your budget. It is equivalent to a 50mm on a full frame or really close at least. GL
TJ

 

[Mooseontheloose]

that would probably be a great lens for a lot of my work, but I think I will only be able to get one lens for a while so I think I might want to get something a little more versatile than a fixed lens. I was also looking at the older 28-200mm and 28-80 for film cameras but the full frame crop will make it more like 45-250 if I'm not mistaken.

 

[PatrickHMS]

Wouldn't 28-80 turn out to be about 42-120 on a crop bodied camera?

If you have $200.00 to spend, you could probably go to Craigslist or eBay and buy a used Nikon AF-S 18-55mm (non VR) "kit" lens, AND a Nikkor AF 50mm 1.8 lens, so you have the versatility of a zoom, with a prime to use to get some experience with.

 

[potownrob]

One vote for the 18-55 VR. Even though the non-VR model (which I have) is said to be better IQ wise, it will torture you if you do lots of night shooting, especially without flash or of things too far away to use the flash on. If I had to do it all over, I personally would take something like the 18-55VR over my Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (which costs twice as much and does have better IQ and build quality) since the constant f/2.8 of the Tamron is still too slow for some of my low light shooting, while the VR would help more for most of what I shoot (mostly non-moving subjects in low light).

 

[Mooseontheloose]

Bringing this back up. I got the 18-55 and its worked out nicely so far. However, i'm going to be shooting some sports at the end of the month and I need a telephoto. I should have around 200ish from my next paycheck to get a new lens. I was just thinking about the nikon 55-200 VR, but does anyone have a better suggestion for the same price range?

 

[potownrob]

From what i've heard, in that price range, the 55-200VR is the one to get, over the similar Sigma and Tamron offerings. If you shoot sports outdoors, this lens should be quick enough to freeze action.

 

[djacobox372]

for $200 you should be able to find a nice used tamron 28-75mm f2.8, or a sigma 24-60mm f2.8.

Both are good everyday lenses, and the fast constant f2.8 aperture is highly desired.