Next Lens...Prime or Zoom?

[Koshua]

Hey guys! I just purchased a Nikon D7200 that came with a 35mm 1.8. I also purchased a Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 for some real estate projects coming up. As for my next lens, I'm having trouble deciding what to get!

I've been thinking about a zoom, such as the Nikkor 18-200 VR II, but after some research, many people go for a full prime kit. After hearing that, I've been contemplating an 85mm.

My question to you is: What lens/lenses would you go for with a $600 budget with my current setup? I love street photography, portraits, landscape, and I'm doing some real estate as well...so basically everything. I'm going to save up for the Nikkor 70-200mm 2/8 VR II, but that's a ways off. Any help would be appreciated!

 

[tim.bennett]

Your 35 covers street photography pretty nicely being roughly 50mm eq. Personally wouldn't go for a longer lens than that for candid street stuff. Definitely not a long zoom.

The 50mm 1.4f g would make a nice portrait lens on the DX sensor coming in at about 75mm eq. But that really depends on what portraits you like to shoot. The 85mm would be great for portraits too but at a different focal length. Between them it's a matter of taste.

18-200 gives flexibility at the cost of speed and a large portion of the focal length it covers that you don't have already will be covered by a 70-200 that you're saving up for. Once you have that beast I'm not sure you'll look at the 18-200 anymore.

An option would be to go for the 1.8 50mm which fill the focal length gaps and not be too expensive. Do also think if you really want the 70-200. It's an awesome but I don't necessarily see a need for it for street, portray and landscape. It works great for portraits but the 50 or 85 would be great options too.

 

[Koshua]

Thanks for the reply Tim (& I like your Flickr)! So you think the 11-16, 35, 50, and 85 would make a good set for my uses? Being in college, the 70-200 would be way down the line. The one thing I've heard is that the 35 and 50 is an either/or purchase and the 50 and 85 is the same.

I might just go straight for the 85mm 1.8 or 1.4, and then fill in the 50mm and 70-200mm eventually. Oh, another thing I forgot to mention: I'm on the brink of starting a DSLR cinema class...no VR on any of the fixed lenses, correct? Is there any way I can get by without VR, or should I swoop one up? I'll be doing mostly stills after this class, so it's not like I need a video arsenal.

 

[fmw]

I think you should choose a telephoto zoom lens that starts at 70 to 80mm and zooms to 200 or 300. There would be some optical compromises with a zoom range of 18-200, at least for me.

Single focal length lenses are superior to zooms because they are simpler, have slightly better edge sharpness and higher contrast thanks to having fewer lens elements. But you can make stunning images with a zoom as well and have the flexibility it provides without giving much up. After that you might consider some prime lenses.

 

[jaomul]

If convenience isn't a major issue you are likely better off with a zoom that zooms by a factor of 3 or 4 or 5 rather than 11 for quality, generally the more zoom the more you will sacrifice.

I think it's good to have a few good zooms complimented by a few good primes. If you had 2 pretty good zooms that go from wide to telephoto you have everything covered, with the primes added when something more is needed.

Everyone has a different view on this and it's down to shooting style

 

[PaulWog]

If you're buying for the sake of rounding out a collection, and you don't know the focal length you want, then this can be an expensive and endless case of GAS.

With that said, I have the 50mm 1.8G and 85mm 1.8G. I had them on DX, I have them on FX. They serve similar purposes on a crop sensor (since they both are at portraiture length on crop), but they are not the same. I would recommend getting the 85mm 1.8G first, since it will be the better portraiture lens. Look to the 50mm if you really want something between 35mm and 85mm after you've gotten the 85mm 1.8G.

Alternatively, (if you're sticking with crop) look at the Sigma 50-100 f1.8 Art. It would serve as a better choice as a portraiture lens over the 70-200 f2.8-ii for a crop sensor camera.

 

[dannylightning]

getting a nice zoom lens is the way to go for me. there are some amazing zoom lenses out there and some bad ones. i have the 18-200mm nikon lens and its a very nice lens over all, it has its issues but for the most part i get some very nice photos with it, allot of people do not like it but i think mine is just fine most of the time but i do like all of my other lenses better..

that nikon 18-140mm is much better from what i hear, that would be a great walk around lens unless you need something that does well in low light. when it comes to prime lenses the lenses i have now are better than the nikon primes i had in the past IMO. when i had that 35mm 1.8 there were many times i was not able to get far away enough from what i wanted to shoot to get it all in the frame. the 50mm i really had to stand way back on my DX camera to get a photo of a car when i would go to a car show, that sigma 18-35mm 1.8 lens i have now works very well for most general shooting i want to do.

the sigma 18-50mm 2.8 would be a really nice choice in your budget and it will do pretty well in low light.

primes are nice but i would rather not change lenses all the time if i do not need to. some prime lenses will give you better image quality than allot of zooms, but there are plenty of zooms out there that will give you great image quality too.

 

[table1349]

Personally if you are asking us what to buy next, you don't need anything. Save you money an buy the 70-200 if you have determined that you need that lens. When you find a need for a new lens buy what fits the need. That is the time to ask about experience and opinions of the various lenses from various manufactures that fit that need.

 

[Alexr25]

Since you are interested in street photography I would go for the Nikon 24mm f/2.8D. On the D7200 it would give a field of view equal to a 35/36mm lens on FF body which IMO is far less intrusive than doing street photography with telephoto lens. Team it up with a Nikon HN-3 lens hood and the lens will be virtually invisible.

 

[Koshua]

Thank you so much guys for the input! After thinking about it overnight and reading these comments, I definitely think I'm going to go with the 85mm or wait and save up for the 70-200mm. I just need something with a little more reach for certain shots, and I think the 70-200mm would be my best bet for what I find myself shooting and wanting to shoot.

 

[tim.bennett]

Tamron do an 85 with vr at 1.8 I believe.

Matt granger on YouTube has done a review on it. Although he does have some links to them they are putting nicer lenses out now.

And thanks for the compliment on my flickr

 

[PaulWog]

Thank you so much guys for the input! After thinking about it overnight and reading these comments, I definitely think I'm going to go with the 85mm or wait and save up for the 70-200mm. I just need something with a little more reach for certain shots, and I think the 70-200mm would be my best bet for what I find myself shooting and wanting to shoot.

What is it about the 70-200 that makes you want to purchase it? Most reviews you will see are on full frame. It's not a crop sensor lens. The whole mantra of "the center of the lens is the sweet spot" is a misnomer. Just the DX center portion of the 70-200 VR-ii is not sharp enough for a modern crop sensor's pixel density. It will still look good, but you wouldn't be utilizing all the glass you would be paying for.

 

[Koshua]

2What is it about the 70-200 that makes you want to purchase it? Most reviews you will see are on full frame. It's not a crop sensor lens. The whole mantra of "the center of the lens is the sweet spot" is a misnomer. Just the DX center portion of the 70-200 VR-ii is not sharp enough for a modern crop sensor's pixel density. It will still look good, but you wouldn't be utilizing all the glass you would be paying for.

Everyone hypes it up as the affordable zoom for Nikons with the best optics. Which others would you recommend for the DX sensor near that range?

 

[PaulWog]

2What is it about the 70-200 that makes you want to purchase it? Most reviews you will see are on full frame. It's not a crop sensor lens. The whole mantra of "the center of the lens is the sweet spot" is a misnomer. Just the DX center portion of the 70-200 VR-ii is not sharp enough for a modern crop sensor's pixel density. It will still look good, but you wouldn't be utilizing all the glass you would be paying for.

Everyone hypes it up as the affordable zoom for Nikons with the best optics. Which others would you recommend for the DX sensor near that range?

Who calls the Nikon 70-200 VR-ii affordable?

I can't recommend anything without knowing what you're looking to shoot.

There are two ways you can look at gear purchases:
1. Tech specs and comparing gear to other gear. As in "I want a 70-200 VR-ii, what else would you recommend that beats it?"
or
2. "I'm looking for an excellent portraiture zoom lens, what is the best option on a crop sensor camera in comparison to the 70-200 VR-ii?"

I still don't know exactly what you intend to use the 70-200 VR-ii for. If it's just for portraiture, the Sigma 50-100 f1.8 Art is a better choice for a crop sensor camera. If it's for events, the Sigma 50-100 f1.8 Art may still be a better choice. It's cheaper, *MUCH* sharper on crop, and shoots at a full stop faster. It's half the price. It would also alleviate the need for a 50 1.8 and an 85 1.8, if you don't mind carrying something heavier.

 

[Koshua]

2What is it about the 70-200 that makes you want to purchase it? Most reviews you will see are on full frame. It's not a crop sensor lens. The whole mantra of "the center of the lens is the sweet spot" is a misnomer. Just the DX center portion of the 70-200 VR-ii is not sharp enough for a modern crop sensor's pixel density. It will still look good, but you wouldn't be utilizing all the glass you would be paying for.

Everyone hypes it up as the affordable zoom for Nikons with the best optics. Which others would you recommend for the DX sensor near that range?

Who calls the Nikon 70-200 VR-ii affordable?

I can't recommend anything without knowing what you're looking to shoot.

There are two ways you can look at gear purchases:
1. Tech specs and comparing gear to other gear. As in "I want a 70-200 VR-ii, what else would you recommend that beats it?"
or
2. "I'm looking for an excellent portraiture zoom lens, what is the best option on a crop sensor camera in comparison to the 70-200 VR-ii?"

I still don't know exactly what you intend to use the 70-200 VR-ii for. If it's just for portraiture, the Sigma 50-100 f1.8 Art is a better choice for a crop sensor camera. If it's for events, the Sigma 50-100 f1.8 Art may still be a better choice. It's cheaper, *MUCH* sharper on crop, and shoots at a full stop faster. It's half the price. It would also alleviate the need for a 50 1.8 and an 85 1.8, if you don't mind carrying something heavier.

Cool, thanks for the info! I was mainly thinking about it for portraiture and personal stuff such as when I go events where I need a longer focal lenth. I'll look into the lenses you've recommended!