Suggestions on next lens

[dustin0479]

I have been looking around for my next lens and cannot make up my mind what to buy. My current lenses are in my sig. We love doing portraits, what lens would you suggest next? (baby on the way so the budget just shrunk, used under $500)

 

[D-B-J]

What do you want this lens to do?

 

[BJF]

Your Nikon 50mm f1.8 can be a good lens for portrait. It is equivalent to 75mm on D80/D300.

 

[andrewleephoto]

You can use your sigma to do portraits at 200mm because telephotos makes everything appear closer together (different perspective). I use a 70-200 f2.8 when I do portraits. Right now, I would just save the money because you got all that you need! If you want, though, you can get an external flash which helps a lot.

 

[Kerbouchard]

Do you have a flash? If not, with the gear that you currently have, an external flash will make a bigger difference to your photography than any lens will. An SB600 or SB700 would be a good place to start.

 

[tirediron]

Agree, a nice SB700 (used SB800 if you can find one), or a good tripod are the two 'missing' items from your collection IMO.

 

[D-B-J]

Agree, a nice SB700 (used SB800 if you can find one), or a good tripod are the two 'missing' items from your collection IMO.

The Sb600 has slightly more power, and of course the SB800 has even more. I'd say a flash and umbrella/stand would be the most useful, especially for portraiture/stills.

 

[dustin0479]

I currently have a SB600, 1x stand and a shoot through. I also have a Manfrotto 3021BN tripod with a Giottos MH-1000 Ballhead. I am working on getting the second SB600 soon (always hitting craigslist)

I have been getting frustrated with the 18-200 because it seems to stammer a bit when trying to focus at the closer distances. I was working with it tonight and was just not getting the quality I was trying for. It seems to not want to focus anything closer than 60" or so.

 

[Kerbouchard]

Well, what focal length do you find yourself shooting more often? Which lens do you use most often? If the 18-200, is it at the wide end or the telephoto end?

Seems you are more likely than we are to know where you want to see some improvement. If it's at the wide end, the 16-85 is regarded as a pretty good lens and can be had used within your budget. If it's at the telephoto end, you can pick up the 70-300 VR, but it's minimum focus distance is right around 60" so, if that's a limitation that's bugging you, it wouldn't be the lens for you.

Knowing what you like to shoot would help us out a bit in giving you a recommendation.

 

[dustin0479]

Good point Kerbouchard.

I hardly ever find myself trying to use below the 50mm, very rare. For facial shots and such I do often find myself nearing the 200mm range.

I was not really even considering the 70-300 VR f4-5.6 because of the aperature range but I guess if I am at the long end I dont need as quick a lens to get the shallow DOF.

 

[Kerbouchard]

The 70-300 VR is actually a pretty nice lens. I love it on both full frame and crop cameras. Full frame offers great DOF and with crop cameras, the 450 efl comes in handy for birding or sports.

In any case, if the variable aperture is something you want to get away from(and I can understand that), consider adding a little bit to your budget, surfing craigslist, and seeing if you can find a good 80-200 2.8. The push-pull version can usually be had below $600. It was pro glass for over a decade. It hasn't stopped being a great lens just because there are newer and better out there.

Other than that, you could consider a used Sigma or Tamron 70-200 2.8 which should fall within your budget. Just make sure you try the lens out before you buy it(this holds true for the Nikon 80-200 2.8 also. Those were photojournalist lenses for a lot of years and some of them got banged up quite a bit). The Sigma and Tamron varieties seem to suffer from a bit more sample variation than the Nikon lenses, but the Nikon lenses are apt to be a bit more heavily used. If you are a smart buyer, you can probably get a great deal on a great lens.

 

[dustin0479]

I had found a quantaray 70-210 f2.8 but was given advice to stay away from them. Are the sigmas much better?

 

[2WheelPhoto]

Compared to your signma 18-200 this lens will rock, and you can find them used pretty right priced: Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 II EX DG APO Macro HSM AF Lens 579-306 B&H

 

[rpm]

i have a question. have you considered selling one of your sigma's? keep the 18-200, sell the other as its already covered by the former, take that extra money and put it into either Nikon 80-200 AF-D 2.8 (if you're looking at telephotos) or maybe an 85mm (1.4D or Sigma's)....

 

[D-B-J]

The 80-200 2.8D is a wonderful lens, and plenty sharp. As for the sigma suggestion, i would try and check out the 85mm 1.4 for portraits--that's a good prime for portraiture. You could also look at the 80-200, mainly because it gives you more focal lengths and working room.