| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/19/2007 11:53:36 PM · #1 |
I have a friend that is looking to spend some money on a new lens or two for his Nikon D50. He currently has the kit 18-55mm and a 55-200mm. I am not a Nikon guy, so I thought i would ask the Nikon crowd:
If my friend was looking to spend $1500, what 2 lenses would give him the best coverage and performance. Lets assume he will be replacing his two current lenses.
|
|
|
|
04/20/2007 12:00:35 AM · #2 |
I like my:
Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X 124AF Pro DX
Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f2.8D
Just my suggestion, but its hard to say without knowing the types of shots he likes to take. You could definitely get these two lens easily for that much money and have money left over.
Just my two cents. I don't have any of the super expensive lens yet (aka the 1000 +), but hopefully one day.
Good luck!
|
|
|
|
04/20/2007 12:07:14 AM · #3 |
Originally posted by rasdub:
I like my:
Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X 124AF Pro DX
Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f2.8D
Just my suggestion, but its hard to say without knowing the types of shots he likes to take. You could definitely get these two lens easily for that much money and have money left over.
Just my two cents. I don't have any of the super expensive lens yet (aka the 1000 +), but hopefully one day.
Good luck! |
Ah yes, what he shoots. Well so far I have seen many wide angle shots and he was just saying how he wants a macro lens. Of course he hasn't had the 55-200 long so maybe that is why I haven't seen any telephoto shots.
I was thinking the Sigma 105mm would be a good macro lens. I know it gets good reviews. Are any of the Nikkor lenses comparable? Or is this "The" lens to get in the 100mm range? |
|
|
|
04/20/2007 01:26:01 AM · #4 |
we have the Nikon 105mm and its a really nice lens, but...it is a specialty lens. There are 2 lens that I could not live without and that is my 70-200 Nikonand my Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM for Nikon The 70-200 is pricey but has served me well, The Sigma has blown me away. I have a lot of work with local and national bands and this lens has yet to fail me.
My husband and I learned to buy right the first time. After buying a few lenses that are now sitting on shelf. It has hurt the pocket big time but we use these lenses everyday.
The best thing to do is decide how and what he plans to shoot
|
|
|
|
04/20/2007 02:23:58 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by khdoss:
we have the Nikon 105mm and its a really nice lens, but...it is a specialty lens. There are 2 lens that I could not live without and that is my 70-200 Nikonand my Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM for Nikon The 70-200 is pricey but has served me well, The Sigma has blown me away. I have a lot of work with local and national bands and this lens has yet to fail me.
My husband and I learned to buy right the first time. After buying a few lenses that are now sitting on shelf. It has hurt the pocket big time but we use these lenses everyday.
The best thing to do is decide how and what he plans to shoot |
I would have to agree...but if the Nikon is out of the price range, try the Sigma eqivalent, get the 30mm Sigma 1.4 as well, and add the cheap but superb 50mm 1.8 Nikon...one of the best lenses in the bag.
Message edited by author 2007-04-20 02:25:53. |
|
|
|
04/20/2007 11:17:18 AM · #6 |
|
|
|
04/20/2007 11:32:11 AM · #7 |
the nikon 80-200 2.8 and nikon 85mm 1.8 are a couple of my favorites, might even have some money left over for a 55mm 1.8 to go with it.
edit to add. If the D-50 is still under warranty do not get rid of the kit lens. It may be required for a exchange or return.
also I went back and read the whole thread. If he wants wide angle I can suggest the Nikon 10.5 mm fisheye or the 20mm 2.8 I have both and they each work quite nice. However it is hard to grab the 20mm out of my bag because the fisheye always says pick me pick me...
Message edited by author 2007-04-20 11:35:49.
|
|
|
|
04/20/2007 11:41:14 AM · #8 |
I don't have it, but this is what I have my eyes on!
Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX VR II
This will replace both his current lenses and add the Tokina 12-24mm for a wide angle .. might be able to squeeze a 50mm f/1.8 with some cash left from $1500 for those lovely bokeh!
Edit : Made it more read-able
Message edited by author 2007-04-20 11:43:03.
|
|
|
|
04/20/2007 11:59:25 AM · #9 |
i waited for almost 5 months to get the 18-200VR, It had it for about a week when it rendered itself defective, Something broke inside the lens it wouldn't focus so I took it back to the store to exchange it. They didnt have any more in stock and I got the same old story maybe a month or two... anyway they offered me a straight up exchange so I got the 80-200 2.8 I am glad I did because it is a great lens seems to be built much better than the 18-200.
Originally posted by vikas:
I don't have it, but this is what I have my eyes on!
Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX VR II
This will replace both his current lenses and add the Tokina 12-24mm for a wide angle .. might be able to squeeze a 50mm f/1.8 with some cash left from $1500 for those lovely bokeh!
Edit : Made it more read-able |
|
|
|
|
04/20/2007 12:10:37 PM · #10 |
So here is what I am seeing so far.
For primes,
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (I knew that but just forgot. I want one for my Canon) ($330)
Nikon 50mm f/1.8 ($150)
Wide zooms,
Tokina 12-24mm ($500)
Tele zooms,
80-200 f/2.8 ($850)
For macro I think I will recommend the Sigma 105mm ($380).
What would be a good walk-around lens. Is the 18-135mm a really sharp lens or just a decent lens with a really good focal range? Is the 18-70 better or about the same?
I know he doesn't want an 18-200mm VR because we talked about that. He wants sharper glass and doesn't mind having two or three lenses to get it. |
|
|
|
04/20/2007 03:34:42 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by Bugzeye:
If he wants wide angle I can suggest the Nikon 10.5 mm fisheye or the 20mm 2.8 I have both and they each work quite nice. However it is hard to grab the 20mm out of my bag because the fisheye always says pick me pick me... |
I also have that 10.5mm fisheye lens and I LOVE IT, however some people don't like the fisheye effect, so I got that Tonika to act as a partner to the Fisheye when the fisheye effect justn't isn't working in the picture. When used correctly, the 10.5 fisheye can be A LOT of fun. Here is what I think are two of my best shots with that 10.5 fisheye. I think it still runs around 400-500 dollars.
 
Good luck! |
|
|
|
04/20/2007 03:48:58 PM · #12 |
I got the 18- 135mm as my kit lens and have been happy. I have been reading that it is sharper than the 18- 200mm VR. My second lens was the Sigma 10- 20mm lens to cover the wider angles and I really enjoy this one. It is on my camera more than the 18- 135mm. For longer range, I am adding the Nikon 70- 300mm VR which I have read very good things about. These two added lenses cost me just under $500 each. I find this gives me great coverage and quality for the money. For macro, I have a 50mm 1.4 lens from my 35mm days and a reversal ring.
[/url] |
|
|
|
04/20/2007 04:02:49 PM · #13 |
Nikon 12-24 f4 - no question about this
|
|
|
|
04/20/2007 04:05:12 PM · #14 |
|
|
|
04/20/2007 04:06:37 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by ralph:
10.5mm fisheye !! |
lots of fun! but renting it for a week was good enough for me
|
|
|
|
04/20/2007 05:08:28 PM · #16 |
Of the kit lenses, the 18-70 is the best. I've spent a bit of time and money to get a strong set of lenses (which are shared by many of the top Nikon photographers here). I've also chosen to use the Nikon glass. I bought into Nikon for the quality which includes the glass and would rather go slower & keep with the whole system.) They are:
50mm 1.8 ($150)
12-24 4.0 (1100)
80-200 VR 2.8 (1500)
105 micro (750)
18-70 kit lens (375)
also the 1.7x extender
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2026 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 01/01/2026 11:21:48 AM EST.
