New D300s! Please recommend a new lens!!

[Biggs88]

Hello all. I sold my D5000 and I got myself a D300s. I am using the kit 18-55mm lens from my D3100 for now. I also have been using my older AF 70-300mm with great results.

However, I want a great lens that can do a little bit of everything. Landscape, studio shots, portraits, ect. . .

I want it to be Autofocus, but since I have the D300s, I do not "need" AF-S.
I also want VR.

I was thinking the Nikkor 18-200mm.

I am looking to spend around $500.

Thanks guys!!!!

 

[Ken Rockwell Fan]

For a everything lens I would much rather have the $200 35mm f/1.8 than a 18-200. The 18-200 isn't much better than the 70-300. If you need a tele save for the 80-200 f/2.8.

 

[Trever1t]

the 18-200vr will give you everything but at a cost over $500 plus it's a bit heavy and not quite as crisp as other lenses (based purely on what I've read, not experiences)

I have a D300s and with the 16-85vr f3.5-5.6 I am able to shoot 90% of my needs. At slightly over $600 it's a compromise between the more expensive and super fast 17-55 f2.8 and the kit lens.

For that extra reach I use a 70-300vr 4.5-5.6 and again a good compromise between the more expensive faster telephoto but it does take wonderfully clean shots.

 

[mrpink]

I want it to be Autofocus, but since I have the D300s, I do not "need" AF-S.
I also want VR.

I was thinking the Nikkor 18-200mm.

I am looking to spend around $500.

Thanks guys!!!!

With that price range, you might want to start looking into off brands.

I have had good luck with my Sigma 18-250mm 3.5-6.3 DC OS. I use it for almost any outdoor activities. For indoor stuff I have my Nikkor 17-55 2.8, but that is about double your budget.








p!nK

 

[Biggs88]

Im not stuck at 500. So these are all good options I have to really look at.

I know it's a cheapy kit lens, but how is the Nikon 18-135mm?

 

[dirtfan21]

Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VR1 and the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 these two lens are very good. You are better off to spend the money on pro glass cause its better for shooting and resale.

 

[orb9220]

Yep wouldn't do for me the all-in-one zooms. For me it's about speed and Image IQ.
And the first thing I did was replace my 18-55 kit lens with a tamron 17-50 f2.8 and usability in lower light and Image IQ took the next step up.

In your boat I would go for Tamron 17-50 or 28-75 f2.8 or look at the Sigma equivalents. There is the new Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC HSM Macro Lens that is getting a lot of good words.

Speed will expand you into lower light & indoors. And allow you to capture motion in less light. And Image IQ will be a big plus.
.

 

[Biggs88]

Yep wouldn't do for me the all-in-one zooms. For me it's about speed and Image IQ.
And the first thing I did was replace my 18-55 kit lens with a tamron 17-50 f2.8 and usability in lower light and Image IQ took the next step up.

In your boat I would go for Tamron 17-50 or 28-75 f2.8 or look at the Sigma equivalents. There is the new Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC HSM Macro Lens that is getting a lot of good words.

Speed will expand you into lower light & indoors. And allow you to capture motion in less light. And Image IQ will be a big plus.
.

I will tell ya what, that Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 is looking very good for my application. . .
Thanks for the help!

And thanks to all for your suggestions. I am still going to go over my options. I may hold off until I get my income tax check. Then, after getting that and putting a couple bills away in the mean time, I should have a nice little chunk of change to play with. . . .

Lets see if I can sit on my hands till then!

 

[tirediron]

Try buying a used 18-70 (The old D70 kit lens) for now, and saving your money for better glass. The 18-70 is one of the best kit lenses ever produced, with the most usable focal length. It doesn't have VR, but do you really need it? (The answer by the way is, 'No'!). I would start saving for the 17-55 or 24-70; you've got an excellent body, get some good glass to go with it!

 

[Biggs88]

you've got an excellent body

Why thankyou! I did just start working out!
LOL.

Naa, I agree with you. I should hold off and get quality glass. I guess that's what i'll do.

I will just have to shoot all these booked weddings with my 18-55mm. . .










*** That last part was a joke***

 

[dirtfan21]

Yes the 18-70mm F3.5-4.5 is a very good lens for a starter kit. I have one and it cost me $160.00 and I will never sell it. Worth every bite that I paid for it. Look at the used market for these or pro lens and save a ton of money.

 

[clbd39]

you have a quality camera body, don't use cheap glass just to "afford it"

if you have a low budget look at decent primes (35mm, 50mm, 180mm etc...)

my suggestions to look into (now and future)
Nikkor 35mm f/1.8, Sigma 50mm f/1.4, Nikkor 180mm f/2.8
Save for Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8

 

[ghache]

deffinetly get a 35/50/85 prime.

 

[djacobox372]

There is no such thing as a "great" lens that can do a bit of everything. "doing everything" compromises everything.

For $500 or less you can buy a near mint 80-200mm f2.8 af-d on ebay.

Optically this lens is just as good as the modern incarnation the $2200 70-200mm f2.8 VR-2. The only things your sacrificing to save all that $$ is focus speed and VR.

This will replace your 70-300mm, so you can sell that and buy a 50mm f1.8 prime.

I would recommend the 35mm f1.8 over the 50, but it cost twice as much due to only being available in af-s versions.

 

[3bayjunkie]

For a everything lens I would much rather have the $200 35mm f/1.8 than a 18-200. The 18-200 isn't much better than the 70-300. If you need a tele save for the 80-200 f/2.8.

Yes! That is what I am getting. It is only just over a grand and so much worth it =)
It is also in that 85mm-105mm range which is where a lot of Pros like to shoot portrait (although a lot shoot much higher than 105mm)

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Lens 1986 B&H Photo