Discussion
I have finally purchased a Nikon D7100 and must now consider which lenses are the essentials. I'm not into any one particular form of photography and would like to take some great landscapes right down to close ups of birds/wildlife, so quite a range.
Currently I have 2 lenses. A 18-55 AF-S DX 1:3.5-5.6 and a 70-300 1:4-5.6G.
So, without going into 4 figure sums, which lenses are going to get me close into the action and still let plenty of light in?(my 300 always seems just too short!)What about really wide angled/fisheye for landscape and close ups? Should I add the 50mm f 1.8 standard lens?
I'm really unsure as to what should be in the camera bag! HELP!
Currently I have 2 lenses. A 18-55 AF-S DX 1:3.5-5.6 and a 70-300 1:4-5.6G.
So, without going into 4 figure sums, which lenses are going to get me close into the action and still let plenty of light in?(my 300 always seems just too short!)What about really wide angled/fisheye for landscape and close ups? Should I add the 50mm f 1.8 standard lens?
I'm really unsure as to what should be in the camera bag! HELP!
Simpo Two said:
'Closer to the action' than 300mm (which you say is too short) would be more than 300mm, eg 400mm. A wide angle or fisheye is going the wrong way.
I appreciate that the 400mm would be an improvement for getting close to the action and that a wide angle is better suited to landscapes etc. Which of these are good but still affordable lenses? i.e is there a 400mm or greater out there with a large aperture that won't break the bank? (Nikon or other) Which lenses are essential for the amateur in your opinion?bernhund said:
Simpo Two said:
'Closer to the action' than 300mm (which you say is too short) would be more than 300mm, eg 400mm. A wide angle or fisheye is going the wrong way.
I appreciate that the 400mm would be an improvement for getting close to the action and that a wide angle is better suited to landscapes etc. Which of these are good but still affordable lenses? i.e is there a 400mm or greater out there with a large aperture that won't break the bank? (Nikon or other) Which lenses are essential for the amateur in your opinion?I think you need to decide what you want to photograph. If it's wildlife, then get a longer lens, if it's landscapes, then IMO between 20- 70 are the best mm (though I know others prefer wider).
Whatever you decide, the more you spend, the better the lens, (zooms) but it's what you do with it that makes the difference [/Maldonado]
Edited by GetCarter on Monday 26th May 17:45
bernhund said:
I appreciate that the 400mm would be an improvement for getting close to the action and that a wide angle is better suited to landscapes etc. Which of these are good but still affordable lenses? i.e is there a 400mm or greater out there with a large aperture that won't break the bank? (Nikon or other)
Sadly not; a 400mm that will admit more light than your current 70-300mm is going to be well into four figures. Aperture costs, unfortunately. Adding a teleconverter to your 70-300 will kill the aperture too, so no use. Probably best to stay with the 300mm and crop to suit.bernhund said:
Which lenses are essential for the amateur in your opinion?
That depends what kind of stuff you like to do. But when I was under budgetary constraints I had the following:In SLR days:
28-50mm
70-210mm f3.5
50mm f1.8
2x macro-focusing teleconverter
In early DSLR days:
18-70mm
70-300mm
60mm macro
But you have to define what the task is before you can look at lenses to do it.
I've seen a Sigma 120-400 f4.5-5.6 for 650 and recognise that if I want a larger aperture, the price could double. So what about Sigma, any good? Sigma also do a 17-70mm f2.8-4 for 368. I'm wondering if these two lenses in addition to what I already have might cover most scenarios for the amateur?
Out of interest, I spend 50 % of my time being a landscape tog with a Nikon (though it earns me hopeless % of my income) and my two 'stay on' lenses are the 70-200 and the 24-70. I have half a dozen other lenses that I use when I need them. Primes aside, it's rarely. Sigma 10-20 getting some use recently. (on an older DX crop sensor)
GetCarter said:
Out of interest, I spend 50 % of my time being a landscape tog with a Nikon (though it earns me hopeless % of my income) and my two 'stay on' lenses are the 70-200 and the 24-70. I have half a dozen other lenses that I use when I need them. Primes aside, it's rarely. Sigma 10-20 getting some use recently. (on an older DX crop sensor)
So I'm pretty much covered already then? Perhaps just lower apertures would be desirable?You have a vast range of focal lengths covered and you have a superb camera which will work very well without much light.
Learn your trade with what you have, because it's easily good enough. Hell, there are people out there doing brilliant work with camera phones or just an old slr and a cheap lens.
Don't fall into the trap that buying better gear will deliver better pics or make you a better photographer.
Learn your trade with what you have, because it's easily good enough. Hell, there are people out there doing brilliant work with camera phones or just an old slr and a cheap lens.
Don't fall into the trap that buying better gear will deliver better pics or make you a better photographer.
bernhund said:
So I'm pretty much covered already then? Perhaps just lower apertures would be desirable?
You're covered in focal length for landscapes and general shooting, but if you have an interest in birds, you'll need to get to 400 and above unless you can get within spitting distance. I use a 500 for birds, and that has a teleconverter on it most of the time.......so I'm at 700mm and I still curse lack of focal length 
bernhund said:
GetCarter said:
Out of interest, I spend 50 % of my time being a landscape tog with a Nikon (though it earns me hopeless % of my income) and my two 'stay on' lenses are the 70-200 and the 24-70. I have half a dozen other lenses that I use when I need them. Primes aside, it's rarely. Sigma 10-20 getting some use recently. (on an older DX crop sensor)
So I'm pretty much covered already then? Perhaps just lower apertures would be desirable?unless you really want to get 'closer'
Edited by GetCarter on Monday 26th May 18:46
All your comments have been very helpful. I would like a 400mm for the wildlife as I just can't see me getting close enough, but on the whole is does sound like I've got most things covered with the lenses I have. I suppose ultimately I was concerned the existing glass was not going to bring out the best from the new camera.
bernhund said:
All your comments have been very helpful. I would like a 400mm for the wildlife as I just can't see me getting close enough, but on the whole is does sound like I've got most things covered with the lenses I have. I suppose ultimately I was concerned the existing glass was not going to bring out the best from the new camera.
Well to fair yes, the lenses you have are both budget lenses so if you spend more money you will get better results, eg in edge and corner sharpness and CA (chromatic aberration). GetCarter's 24-70 of course is on a full frame camera so you need to remember that makes a difference. The 'equivalent' for DX is the 17-55mm f2.8 - great lens but that will be 1K gone.As for Sigma, I think 'mixed' is the answer. Some are very good - the 70-200 f2.8 for example; others less so.
bernhund said:
I had also been considering the SB-700 flash too. Could anyone advise whether this could be a good investment over just using the built in flash.
Vastly.ETA: On reflection I think you should prioritise your needs, because it's clear that to replace everything at once properly is going to cost thousands, and pick them off one by one as funds allow. Which one you fix first is up to you and your needs.
IIRC when I was in this position my order was (1) fast wide angle (2) flash (3) fast telephoto. But that was for weddings, and as they say 'YMMV'!
Edited by Simpo Two on Monday 26th May 20:48
Simpo Two said:
bernhund said:
All your comments have been very helpful. I would like a 400mm for the wildlife as I just can't see me getting close enough, but on the whole is does sound like I've got most things covered with the lenses I have. I suppose ultimately I was concerned the existing glass was not going to bring out the best from the new camera.
Well to fair yes, the lenses you have are both budget lenses so if you spend more money you will get better results, eg in edge and corner sharpness and CA (chromatic aberration). GetCarter's 24-70 of course is on a full frame camera so you need to remember that makes a difference. The 'equivalent' for DX is the 17-55mm f2.8 - great lens but that will be 1K gone.As for Sigma, I think 'mixed' is the answer. Some are very good - the 70-200 f2.8 for example; others less so.
bernhund said:
I had also been considering the SB-700 flash too. Could anyone advise whether this could be a good investment over just using the built in flash.
Vastly.ETA: On reflection I think you should prioritise your needs, because it's clear that to replace everything at once properly is going to cost thousands, and pick them off one by one as funds allow. Which one you fix first is up to you and your needs.
IIRC when I was in this position my order was (1) fast wide angle (2) flash (3) fast telephoto. But that was for weddings, and as they say 'YMMV'!
Edited by Simpo Two on Monday 26th May 20:48
Simpo Two said:
ETA: On reflection I think you should prioritise your needs, because it's clear that to replace everything at once properly is going to cost thousands, and pick them off one by one as funds allow. Which one you fix first is up to you and your needs.
Simpo, I assume you prepared this response for use on another web forum somewhere. It's clearly NOT of the usual PH standard.LongQ said:
Simpo, I assume you prepared this response for use on another web forum somewhere. It's clearly NOT of the usual PH standard.
Nope, every reply hand-crafted 
Actually I got my shopping list order wrong - I got the flash first (SB800) because I knew the built-in one would be useless for a wedding. My next lesson was that slow lenses won't AF in low light...
Simpo Two said:
LongQ said:
Simpo, I assume you prepared this response for use on another web forum somewhere. It's clearly NOT of the usual PH standard.
Nope, every reply hand-crafted Actually I got my shopping list order wrong - I got the flash first (SB800) because I knew the built-in one would be useless for a wedding. My next lesson was that slow lenses won't AF in low light...
The only real solution, in PH terms, is to buy everything and acquire all known solutions to the problems presented in a single buying spree. Anything less is incredibly bad form for PH suggesting at is might that the problem owner is both impecunious and indecisive. Whilst both may of course be true reflections of the problem holder's position to even hint that such might be the case is just not the way things are done around here as I am sure you well know.
te Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff