Which Lens Next?
Discussion
I have had my Nikon D3000 since they were released a while ago and have enjoyed using and experimenting with it, I have recently started getting into editing and printing a lot more.
The question is I am now looking for a new lens; I am particularly looking for a zoom lens. As at the moment, I only have the 18-55VR kit lens.
I would like advice on maybe which lens I should buy costs and places to buy them.
Thanks in advance.
The question is I am now looking for a new lens; I am particularly looking for a zoom lens. As at the moment, I only have the 18-55VR kit lens.
I would like advice on maybe which lens I should buy costs and places to buy them.
Thanks in advance.
I have a Nikon D40 with the 18-55 lens and after a year I chose the 70-300 lens ( which is quite heavy)...another year on and I'm now thinking of buying a macro lens.
I've only used the zoom lens at some motorsport events, mainly because it is quite heavy to cart around with you all day. Changeing the lenses can be a bit of a nuisance as you don't want any dust to get into the camera body. With hindsight I should have gone for the 18-200
I've only used the zoom lens at some motorsport events, mainly because it is quite heavy to cart around with you all day. Changeing the lenses can be a bit of a nuisance as you don't want any dust to get into the camera body. With hindsight I should have gone for the 18-200
condor said:
Scho said:
Get a proper macro lens if you want to experiment, whole new world opens up that you can't access any other way.
Check our 4hero's stuff for inspiration.
What would be a proper macro lens then? budget up to £500Check our 4hero's stuff for inspiration.
I paid less than 500 for my canon fit lens so i'm guessing you can get a decent bit of kit for that sort of dosh.
condor said:
I obviously have - I've always heard it being referred to as a zoom lens ( the big one I mean)...I'll try to remember to call it telephoto from now on
Or even better, 'telephoto zoom' to distinguish it from a prime (eg 400mm) 
Macro lens - Nikon do very good 60mm and 105mm macro lenses called Micro-Nikkors; Tamron make a well-respected 90mm. All will give 1:1 magnifcation but the longer the focal length the greater the working distance - which may or may not be important to you. As Scho says, it's a whole new world but it can take some getting used to.
As for the OP, if you want a telephoto zoom then I'd recommend the Nikon 70-300mm VR (subject to budget).
Edited by Simpo Two on Monday 22 March 15:30
I've had a look on Amazon, and they have some cheapy filter type lenses that do 10xmag macro stuff for £40. Is that a good idea to try just as an amateur...from what I gather, you just attach this magnifying lens to the base of your prime...or perhaps even telephoto lens and voila!
Somehow, I don't think it's as simple as that.
Simpo you just recomended the lens I bought and then decided wasn't a good idea after all ( due to heaviness and needing to change the lens all the time).
Somehow, I don't think it's as simple as that.
Simpo
you just recomended the lens I bought and then decided wasn't a good idea after all ( due to heaviness and needing to change the lens all the time).condor said:
I've had a look on Amazon, and they have some cheapy filter type lenses that do 10xmag macro stuff for £40. Is that a good idea to try just as an amateur...from what I gather, you just attach this magnifying lens to the base of your prime...or perhaps even telephoto lens and voila!
Somehow, I don't think it's as simple as that.
Well it's a cheap way to get started in macro - though such 'close-up' lenses (Nikon call them 'diopters') go on the front of the lens not the back. If it goes behind it's probably a teleconverter which is a different thing.Somehow, I don't think it's as simple as that.
Strap-on close-up lenses are cheap and you'll retain metering and AF, but I suspect at the cost of image quality, especially in the corners.
condor said:
Simpo you just recomended the lens I bought and then decided wasn't a good idea after all ( due to heaviness and needing to change the lens all the time).
Women! you just recomended the lens I bought and then decided wasn't a good idea after all ( due to heaviness and needing to change the lens all the time).Edited by Simpo Two on Tuesday 23 March 16:29
From the list Amazon had, there were some that went on the back, and some that went on the front. I'd assume that the ones that fit on the front would fit in a similar way the lens cap does...Is that correct?
It was more a question on whether it was a waste of money to go for the cheapy option and experiment first, or just buy the proper Nikon one.
I'll eventually sell my 2 year old camera and buy a better one, so I need to stay with Nikon so I can continue to use the lenses.
Most of the time it's on auto as I haven't learned how useful the other programmes are...even though I've read the book
It was more a question on whether it was a waste of money to go for the cheapy option and experiment first, or just buy the proper Nikon one.
I'll eventually sell my 2 year old camera and buy a better one, so I need to stay with Nikon so I can continue to use the lenses.
Most of the time it's on auto as I haven't learned how useful the other programmes are...even though I've read the book
condor said:
From the list Amazon had, there were some that went on the back, and some that went on the front. I'd assume that the ones that fit on the front would fit in a similar way the lens cap does...Is that correct?
They screw in to the filter thread, so you need to get the right size.condor said:
It was more a question on whether it was a waste of money to go for the cheapy option and experiment first, or just buy the proper Nikon one.
Like anything, the more you pay the better it will be - as you'd expect the Micro-Nikkors will romp all over £40 gadgets. But you could always try the cheapos first as an introduction to macro, and if you like it, sell them on eBay and buy a dedicated macro lens. Or try a s/h macro lens and resell if you don't like it - you'll get most if not all of your money back.Edited by Simpo Two on Tuesday 23 March 18:50
The 24-70mm is a £1200 lens and worth every penny. Drop dead gorgeous image quality and razor sharp. I use it on a Nikon D300s (cropped sensor) as a general studio portrait lens and on my Nikon F5 film camera too. On a D700 its awesome! But... the 18-105mm is a top general purpose lens recommendation for the OP. The 70-300 is also very good and as sharp as my 70-200 f2.8 in the mid f stop range.
Sorry for hijacking but I'm considering second hand D40s and one seller has a 15-55 F2.8 IS USM lens which has cracking reviews and the other has a 24-70 F2.8 USM (non-IS) L class lens (and also a 10-22 f2.8). Given the cropped sensor I was wondering which might be a better option and also whether if I went for one or other of these I would find myself needing a wider range lens (like the 18-105) myself. In fact you might be a good person to answer my other post re SLR/lens choice if you don't mind helping.
http://www.pistonheads.com/xforums/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Thanks
Dan
http://www.pistonheads.com/xforums/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Thanks
Dan
Edited by dan1502 on Tuesday 23 March 22:16
dan1502 said:
Sorry for hijacking but I'm considering second hand D40s and one seller has a 15-55 F2.8 IS USM lens which has cracking reviews and the other has a 24-70 F2.8 USM (non-IS) L class lens (and also a 10-22 f2.8). Given the cropped sensor I was wondering which might be a better option and also whether if I went for one or other of these I would find myself needing a wider range lens (like the 18-105) myself.
A 'D40s' sounds a bit like a Nikon but 'USM' and 'L' are Canon terms... 
Anyway, the main difference is that the f2.8 lenses are faster, whilst the 18-105 'one size fits all' will be slower and probably lower image quality. You have to decide whether you need speed or zoom ratio,
Sorry, I meant EOS 40D (or 50D) - I'm getting tired!. I know the difference but am wondering whether I would be better starting with an all round lens or going for a much higher quality but less flexible lens such as the 17-55 (second hand around £500 - £650 for the lens). I'm edging towards the good lens option but don't want to be left thinking I could really do with a longer lens. Eventually I envisage getting an ultra wide angle, a macro lens and probably something like a 70-200 but will not be able to afford any of these straight away if I splash out on the 40D or 50D and quality 17-55. Would you consider an 18-55 a good all rounder given the 1.6 ratio of the cropped sensor?
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff