Nikon D7000 lens help!!

ssff · Nov 27, 2012

Hello

I am buying aNikon D7000 and am just overwhelmed with lens options....I just need some basic understanding for them
The two kits available with the body are 18-105 and 18-200 and someone said, 18-200, that'll be a crappy lens, why is that? Is it just because zoom lenses compromise quality of picture?

My primary goal will be to do more people photography, street photography, some landscapes maybe, and I'd like to get lenses which are good for motion and low light too

I don't have a very high budget and just want to understand also why some lenses are so much more expensive (like a 70-200 is more exp than an 18-200, why?)

I've been told a 35 mm or 50 mm prime will be a good choice, and I think a 50 mm is good for portraits no? It shows the subject as is without zoom? While a 35,, would provide some telephoto factor?
The what about zoom lenses?

I want to invest in this to go ahead and work shoots, and they may include indoor or event shoots as well (weddings, barmitzvahs etc) so need lenses accordingly

Thanks for any help!!

pixmedic · Nov 27, 2012

35mm and 50mm are fixed focal lenses. NO zoom. they are "fixed" at that focal spot.
as for zooms, the longer the focal range, the more you sacrifice in image quality. they are also usually a variable aperture. fixed aperture zooms usually provide better image quality and allow more control of the amount of light they let it.
im sure someone will come along that can give a much more detailed and technical explanation for it than I can (KMH and Mleek have some ridiculously excellent posts concerning that very issue)
the 18-105 VR lens is a great kit lens. it doesnt have the zoom range of the 18-200, but I believe it is a little better quality wise.
for low light, you want a lens with a fixed aperture. zooms will typically be f/2.8, prime lenses can be f/1.8, f/1.4 (and several others) the fixed focal lenses will have a larger max aperture and are best suited for low light.

fjrabon · Nov 27, 2012

First thing to understand is the four basic ranges of focal lengths and what they do:

1) Wide angle - for a D7000, everything between 10mm-24mm is considered wide angle. These are used to show depth, to draw the viewer into the photo. They exaggerate perspective and make things feel deeper than they really are. These lenses force/encourage you to get closer to what you are shooting.
2) Neutral - for a D7000, 30mm-40mm are considered neutral. 35mm being the usual choice for a 'what the eye sees' perspective. These lenses will show the world, basically, just as you see it through your eyes, or at least as close as a camera can get to that.
3) mild telephoto - for a D7000 50mm-85mm These are classic portrait focal lengths. They will take away some of the depth of faces, making them more visually appealing in most cases. They also typically provide enough magnification to give you a nice blurred background when combined with a fast aperture (f/2.8 or lower). They give you some distance from you and your subject and tend to be what people think of when they think about 'looking at a picture'
4) telephoto - 90mm-300mm - These are your classic long lenses, primarily used to take shots from far away that appear close up. They also will compress depth and isolate subjects. They are also good for portraits if you want even shallower DoF and even more compression.

next understand what f/stop is, and what it does. This controls how much light the lens lets in per second and it also when combined with a lenses focal length, controls depth of field (ie how much of the photo is in focus). A lens with a lower f/stop is generally more valuable, as it gives you better ability to shoot with less light, and have more control over your depth of field. Zooms usually are best at f/2.8. This is why the 70-200 you noted costed more than the 55-300 you noted. The 70-200 is most likely an f/2.8 lens across all of its focal lengths. That is, you can use f/2.8 with it all the time if you wish. The 55-300 is likely an f/4-5.6 lens, meaning that at the 55mm end, you can only use f/4 as your fastest aperture, whereas at the time end, the fastest you can use if f/5.6. It also is just generally not built as well at the 70-200mm f/2.8, which is a pro level lens.

Primes can typically allow you to have faster f/stops and sharper images, because they're purpose built for one single focal length. That means that the optics can be perfectly tailored to do one thing, and do it extremely well. If you need or want to shoot at f/1.4, you're going to be using a prime. Zoom lenses don't go that low f/stop wise.

ssff · Nov 27, 2012

Thanks pixmedic for your response!

Fjrabon: That was exactly the explanation I was looking for, thanks! That explains why a 50mm f1.8 is only $110 while a 50mm f1.4 is about $300, cause you get better low light photography and more depth of field right!
The 18-200 in the kit is f3.5 to 5.6 so the f3.5 can only be used at 18mm.... is it better to not get that and invest in a fixed lens instead? The 18-105 is also the same, f3.5 to 5.6, while if I get a 50mm prime, at f1.8, the result is different than when I use my zoom lens at 50mm right?

How is a combination of the 18-55 f3/5 to 5.6, and a 70-300 f4 t0 5.6 and a 50mm f1.8 sound? Does that cover all bases and I get decent picture quality?

fjrabon · Nov 27, 2012

ssff said:
Thanks pixmedic for your response!

Fjrabon: That was exactly the explanation I was looking for, thanks! That explains why a 50mm f1.8 is only $110 while a 50mm f1.4 is about $300, cause you get better low light photography and more depth of field right!
The 18-200 in the kit is f3.5 to 5.6 so the f3.5 can only be used at 18mm.... is it better to not get that and invest in a fixed lens instead? The 18-105 is also the same, f3.5 to 5.6, while if I get a 50mm prime, at f1.8, the result is different than when I use my zoom lens at 50mm right?

How is a combination of the 18-55 f3/5 to 5.6, and a 70-300 f4 t0 5.6 and a 50mm f1.8 sound? Does that cover all bases and I get decent picture quality?

You get more control over your depth of field. I think that's what you meant, but usually 'more depth of field' is taken to mean a deeper depth of field, ie higher f/stop numbers, which both lenses can do (f/1.8 is just the minimum, pretty much all lenses can go up to at least f/22, what people care about is the minimum).

On a crop frame (which the D7000 is), I think you're going to get 1 prime, the 35mm f/1.8g is your best bet, IMHO, it is THE best relatively affordable street photography lens on a crop frame. 50mm on a crop frame isn't very good for street, as you can't get as into the scene with that. The 50mm is a mild telephoto lens, which many people find a bit tight. They can be used for portraits, but so can your 70-300. I have no experience with the 70-300. With your D7000, I'd probably advocate buying an older 80-200 f/2.8 push pull, which can be had for around $400 on ebay and the like. They're a bit slow to focus, but that's not a big deal unless you're shooting sports, and it was the top of the line professional telephoto for years, and still produces stunning images.

My recommendations for the D7000 are usually as follows:
Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 (the cheaper $500 one, since the D7000 has a body focus motor and thus doesn't need the lens focus motor in the more expensive $700+ model)
Tamron 24-70 f/2.8
Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 (the 2 ring if you shoot sports, the push pull if you don't)
Tamron 60mm f/2 (for portraits and macro photography)
Nikon 35mm f/1.8G

Now, some of these can be compromised, depending on what you mostly shoot and don't shoot, that's just to give you a baseline for probably as good of quality glass as you'll ever need/want on a D7000. Given what you've said, I'd probably get a 35mm f/1.8 for street, the 18-55 is fine for general walk around and landscape, and the 80-200 f/2.8 push pull for portraits. You'll have a gap between 55mm and 80mm, and down the road you can add the 60mm f/2 tamron to fill that (which is a stunning portrait lens). You can use the 35mm f/1.8 and the 80-200 f/2.8 for low light situations.

TheLost · Nov 28, 2012

I'm a day late to the party... but here is my .00002 cents.

Whats the price difference of the two kits? If they are close... i would TOTALLY take the 18-200mm over the 18-105mm any day for a kit lens. In fact, I did (I bought the D7000 w/18-200mm kit when it came out). The 18-200mm is a guilty pleasure of mine.. I have much better glass, but can't bring myself to sell it.

The 18-200mm gets a bad reputation on *any* forum.. but in truth its just as good as the 18-105mm BUT gives you the extra range and a bit better build quality. I suggest you head over to Flickr and search for pictures taken with the 18-200mm before you start believing all the forum "pro's".

You'll notice people have already started telling you to get better (f/2.8) glass... IMHO, any kit lens and a good cheap prime is the best way to get into the hobby. Don't go out and spend a fortune on lenses you don't know how to use.

You should buy your lenses WHEN YOU NEED THEM.. If you don't know how its going to help you... then you don't need them

<side rant>
Its like a tripod... lots of people buy a crappy tripod when they buy their camera because the sales guy says they need one. Then it sits in the closet collecting dust for years... because they never really needed it or knew why/how/when to use it! when they do actually need one they find out its a POS and end up buying a better one anyway.
</side rant>

I've had the 50mm 1.8d for years and would highly recommend it. If you hunt around you can find a refurbished for super cheap!

TheLost · Nov 28, 2012

ssff said:
How is a combination of the 18-55 f3/5 to 5.6, and a 70-300 f4 t0 5.6 and a 50mm f1.8 sound? Does that cover all bases and I get decent picture quality?

*the horse is dead.. but i'm going to beat it again*... What are you going to use the 70-300mm for? Do you have kids that play sports? if so, what sport? Want to do some birding (taking pictures of birds)?

Did you know there are two 70-300mm's? One is horribly bad... One is an awesome 'semi-pro' level lens. Guess which one the f/4-5.6 is

... Hint: The f/4.5-5.6 VR 70-300mm is the better lens.

In all of the examples i mentioned above.. The 18-200mm would be better then the cheap 70-300 non-VR. It has faster auto focus and better IQ. The 70-300mm VR is better then the 18-200mm but you really have to pixel peep (but you get the choice of a wider angle shot with the super zoom).

Kit lens + prime = best way to go. Add the rest when you NEED IT.

ssff · Nov 28, 2012

TheLost said:
Whats the price difference of the two kits? If they are close... i would TOTALLY take the 18-200mm over the 18-105mm any day for a kit lens. In fact, I did (I bought the D7000 w/18-200mm kit when it came out). The 18-200mm is a guilty pleasure of mine.. I have much better glass, but can't bring myself to sell it.

Hello! Thanks for all the opinions...my head is spinning a bit now...

The D7000 kit with the 18-105 DX VR is $1200 vs with the 18-200 is $1500....is the extra 300 worth it?
I can't afford th 16-85 right now, but could add a prime 50mm f 1.8 to the kit, its a hundred bucks...i like my pictures a little tight so don't mind the mild zoom, and I'd get better bokeh or picture quality using it than using the 50mm on my zoom lens right?

Thanks!