New to DSLR, lens advice please!
Discussion
Hi all,
I received a Nikon D3000 with kit 18-55mm VR lens for Christmas. I'm pretty handy with my trusty Canon IXUS point & shoot but my Dad thoughtfully got me the DSLR as I take quite a few pics at various F1 races, track days etc.
So, I'm looking to buy another lens with better zoon for this type of photography but also in mind for general picture taking (holidays etc). Sadly I don't think I'll ever have the skill/time to get into photography as 'an art' so it doesn't have to be too professional as such, I'm just after taking some better quality photos than I can with the IXUS.
I had thought about the Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR (5.5x), I would like to keep with Nikon to match the camera and also to utilise the AF & VR functions. I don't however want to end up with a lens with too much focal length which I guess could be a compromise in the certain qualities in other areas? As I say, I'm new to this at the moment so don't want to make the wrong purchase before I fully understand what kind of apertures, shutter speeds etc that I need from the lens.
Any advice greatly appreciated.
Nath
I received a Nikon D3000 with kit 18-55mm VR lens for Christmas. I'm pretty handy with my trusty Canon IXUS point & shoot but my Dad thoughtfully got me the DSLR as I take quite a few pics at various F1 races, track days etc.
So, I'm looking to buy another lens with better zoon for this type of photography but also in mind for general picture taking (holidays etc). Sadly I don't think I'll ever have the skill/time to get into photography as 'an art' so it doesn't have to be too professional as such, I'm just after taking some better quality photos than I can with the IXUS.
I had thought about the Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR (5.5x), I would like to keep with Nikon to match the camera and also to utilise the AF & VR functions. I don't however want to end up with a lens with too much focal length which I guess could be a compromise in the certain qualities in other areas? As I say, I'm new to this at the moment so don't want to make the wrong purchase before I fully understand what kind of apertures, shutter speeds etc that I need from the lens.
Any advice greatly appreciated.
Nath
I have had the same camera for a couple months now and am in a similar position.
I was looking at this lens...
http://www.procamerashop.co.uk/product/Nikon_AF-S_...
55-200, only £135, seen it in stock for £139 on another site but can't remember which one! Doh!
I'm no technical expert on lenses, just look at what is the best I can afford, and what I see is the best value...to me this fits the bill.
Dave
I was looking at this lens...
http://www.procamerashop.co.uk/product/Nikon_AF-S_...
55-200, only £135, seen it in stock for £139 on another site but can't remember which one! Doh!
I'm no technical expert on lenses, just look at what is the best I can afford, and what I see is the best value...to me this fits the bill.
Dave
If a 200mm focal length is enough, then that lens that baller11 has linked to is a hard to beat for the money. When you're hand holding the camera, VR is very useful at longer focal lengths to avoid blurry images, particularly in poor light.
If you need a bit more reach than 200mm, and want to stick with Nikon lenses, as you say you're probably looking at the 55-300 VR Nikon lens which starts about £300 new or £200 used (or scour ebay for a bargain). Make sure it is the AF-s version though or else it'll not auto focus with your camera.
If you want to spend a little less, Jessops do a 70-300mm Tamron for less than £100 right now. I have this lens and it is good value but has no image stabilisation and is a little 'soft' at 300mm. You can take soem cracking shots with it but you may also be frustrated with how many duds you take. I took this with the Tamron at 300mm but I took an awful lot of duds that day as well!
Blue tit by G.A.D, on Flickr
If you need a bit more reach than 200mm, and want to stick with Nikon lenses, as you say you're probably looking at the 55-300 VR Nikon lens which starts about £300 new or £200 used (or scour ebay for a bargain). Make sure it is the AF-s version though or else it'll not auto focus with your camera.
If you want to spend a little less, Jessops do a 70-300mm Tamron for less than £100 right now. I have this lens and it is good value but has no image stabilisation and is a little 'soft' at 300mm. You can take soem cracking shots with it but you may also be frustrated with how many duds you take. I took this with the Tamron at 300mm but I took an awful lot of duds that day as well!
Blue tit by G.A.D, on Flickr
Edited by Gad-Westy on Friday 7th January 12:19
This site is great for Nikon Reviews:
He seems to reckon that the Nikon 70-300 may be a better bet for fast moving subjects. I think they're about £50 more than the 55-300, new and used.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55-300mm.htm
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/70-300-vr.htm
He seems to reckon that the Nikon 70-300 may be a better bet for fast moving subjects. I think they're about £50 more than the 55-300, new and used.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55-300mm.htm
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/70-300-vr.htm
Edited by Gad-Westy on Friday 7th January 12:22
Best quote I ever read about Ken Rockwell, kinda' sums him up: "He is the kind of guy that if he kicks his car in the morning and it starts, then that must be the way all cars work and he starts a web site about it".
I'd take EVERYTHING Ken Rockwell says with a very large sack of salt.
I'd take EVERYTHING Ken Rockwell says with a very large sack of salt.
GetCarter said:
Best quote I ever read about Ken Rockwell, kinda' sums him up: "He is the kind of guy that if he kicks his car in the morning and it starts, then that must be the way all cars work and he starts a web site about it".
I'd take EVERYTHING Ken Rockwell says with a very large sack of salt.
Cheers for the tip off. I hadn't realised he wasn't well regarded. It's still probably quite a useful resource for general info, lens availability etc..I'd take EVERYTHING Ken Rockwell says with a very large sack of salt.
Is there anything else similar? DP review seem a little thin on content and Amazon reviewers give everything 5 stars!
Simpo Two said:
Or you can apply the acronym 'YGWYPF' and be fairly confident that the more it costs, the better it is
I'd probably subscribe to this, with the exception of a nifty fifty.Probably the cheapest lens you can buy, and an essential in the collection.
Around £100 for an f/1.8, but you can get such satisfying results that a P&S would never touch.
Maybe no appropriate for your original query, but stick in your wish list.
At the moment I'm very torn between the 55-300 and 70-300 and really can't decide.
Cheapskate in me says the 55, as it's capabilities are likely to be greater than mine.
Purists say that buy the best glass you can all the time though, as you'll grow into it.
If you want something long and cheap (ooh-er), I'd sell you a sigma 70-300 with nae AF for about £100.
BigAlinEmbra said:
Simpo Two said:
Or you can apply the acronym 'YGWYPF' and be fairly confident that the more it costs, the better it is
I'd probably subscribe to this, with the exception of a nifty fifty.Probably the cheapest lens you can buy, and an essential in the collection.
Around £100 for an f/1.8, but you can get such satisfying results that a P&S would never touch.
Maybe no appropriate for your original query, but stick in your wish list.
At the moment I'm very torn between the 55-300 and 70-300 and really can't decide.
Cheapskate in me says the 55, as it's capabilities are likely to be greater than mine.
Purists say that buy the best glass you can all the time though, as you'll grow into it.
If you want something long and cheap (ooh-er), I'd sell you a sigma 70-300 with nae AF for about £100.
Gad-Westy said:
BigAlinEmbra said:
Simpo Two said:
Or you can apply the acronym 'YGWYPF' and be fairly confident that the more it costs, the better it is
I'd probably subscribe to this, with the exception of a nifty fifty.Probably the cheapest lens you can buy, and an essential in the collection.
Around £100 for an f/1.8, but you can get such satisfying results that a P&S would never touch.
Maybe no appropriate for your original query, but stick in your wish list.
At the moment I'm very torn between the 55-300 and 70-300 and really can't decide.
Cheapskate in me says the 55, as it's capabilities are likely to be greater than mine.
Purists say that buy the best glass you can all the time though, as you'll grow into it.
If you want something long and cheap (ooh-er), I'd sell you a sigma 70-300 with nae AF for about £100.
I just think it's a great lens for the money, and an excellent way of getting to grips with manual focus.
Part of the enjoyment for me as a hamfisted gibbon is getting a decent picture that I've actually focussed myself.
NathR said:
I'll have a read through the reviews pointed out but I suppose the main thing I need advice on is for the type of photography stated will I need a 200mm or 300mm max focal length?
It depends how far away you are My 'airshow' lens is a Nikkor 70-300VR - lovely lens if not great maximum aperture - but at £400 probably more than you had in mind.
Go to a shop and try both ranges on your camera; that will probably tell you which is right for you.
Bear in mind that it may be cheaper and better to get a shorter lens (the 70-200 f2.8 is very well regarded) and stick it on a teleconverter (1.4x or 2x usually), instead of buying a longer lens.
Have you thought of hiring an example of what you're thinking of and 'trialling' it for a weekend?
Have you thought of hiring an example of what you're thinking of and 'trialling' it for a weekend?
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff