Lens Advice

[astrostu]

From my dad: "The situation. This person will only have one lens for a Nikon D90. What lens choices would recommend in a price range of 200-500 dollars? They are borrowing a friend's Tamaron 55-200mm lens."

Ideas?

[Fox Paw]

I don't know what Nikon offers. When I got my Canon and had only one lens, it was the 17-85mm. I thought that was about the right range of focal lengths to cover if you could only have a single lens, so I'd look for something fairly equivalent in the Nikon line.

[astrostu]

That's what I was thinking, as I'm a Canon guy, too. But if they're using a Tamaron, then I was thinking maybe someone had a good idea for a Tamaron or a Sigma that could work, as well.

[MissMia]

You can never go wrong with the Nifty Fifty for $125!
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/247091-USA/Nikon_2137_Normal_AF_Nikkor_50mm.html

Not knowing what kind of photography they are interested in, it's difficult to suggest a lens.

[icassell]

I guess it all depends what you want to shoot. My favorite walkaround lens is my Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 (I have the non stabilized older version). It wouldn't be much good for birds, though...

[Fox Paw]

I have two Tamrons, a 10-24 and a 70-300. I love both but I wouldn't suggest either one to a person who was going to have only one lens.

[Teachdna]

Hi People:
AstroStu's dad here. I thought it would be easier if I joined the discussion directly rather than having to go thru an intermediary.

Let me expand the situation a bit. This young man was assigned to shepherd me on a recent trip I had to make to China. He clearly loves taking pictures- I would call them snapshots at this point. But they entail all subjects at all distances. Friends at monuments, sweeping vistas, statues, etc. Now clearly one lens won't do a great job for all these situations. But he can't even afford one lens.

You have to realize, even though he is a doctor, they are paid about $2 for seeing a patient and get to keep about 25 cents. So he currently borrows a lens whenever he needs to take a picture.

He took an extraordinary amount of time and effort to make my stay a memorable one. He mentioned that he is saving for a lens but that it will take him 3 years. I'd like to make a gift of a lens to him and so, the question AstroStu posed.

What would be the most serviceable, one Nikkor lens I could send that would: A) be the best compromise for what are essentially snapshots; b) might give the kind of picture that would truly begin to allow him to explore his creativity; c) would provide him with the most pleasure. Realizing that he will not be purchasing another for some years.

I was figuring a 70-300mm f4.5 with vibration reduction but in looking at the BH site, I'm thinking about the following:

Nikon AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED Telephoto Zoom Lens

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR Zoom Lens


AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED Lens

What would be the pros/cons of these 3 lens for this guy?

[Fox Paw]

Teachdna, welcome, and thanks for joining the discussion. We've enjoyed your son's presence.

Take all my coments with a grain of salt because I am no expert.

You say that he likes sweeping vistas. Every lens you identify is 55mm or higher. That's too high for anyone who likes, even occasionally, to photograph large scenes. I'd still favor a zoom that began at about 17mm and topped out wherever. I suggest that focal length should be the primary consideration and apertures, etc., are distinctly secondary.

[Teachdna]

Thanks for the input: that sounds reasonable. I'll listen to the board for a day or so; calibrate responses and make a final decision over the weekend. I'm sure that whatever I buy, he'll be more than thrilled to receive his first lens.

But I'd like to do the best by him that I can.

[Fox Paw]

Makes sense.

Anecdotal footnote: I have four lenses. A Canon 17-40mmL (my best), Tamron 10-24, Tamron 70-300, and the Canon 17-85 I mentioned. The 17-85 is the cheapest and optically poorest. When I went backpacking last fall and could only take a single lens, though, it's the one I took, because it's the most versatile for a wide variety of situations. The differences in quality are small--almost invisible on the internet, visible with prints--and matter mostly to photographers who are pretty advanced.

[kundalini]

Hi Teachdna, it sounds like you have a good heart if I get the gist of this conversation. There are many lens options available for the D90, but sadly it will not come in one package with a decent IQ (image quality) because of the manufacturing compromises needed for a very long focal range. I would suggest two lenses, but I would also take an external flash in lieu of a second lens, but that's just me being me. The lenses I refer to are the kit (consumer grade) 18-55mm and the 55-200mm variable apertures. They need good light but they can also deliver really good results. They also provide a very good focal range. You'll have to look up the prices, but they can be had for a reasonable price.

In the early days, an external flash will likely yield more keepers than an expensive lens. You don't need TTL compatibility because eventually you'll be shooting the flash on manual mode anyway and then off camera. A Vivatar 285 or similar is good.

Just my 2¢.

[kundalini]

]But I'd like to do the best by him that I can.
That would require a budget (dollar amount) for a reasonable suggestion.

One person may consider $100 to be a reasonable tip, another an appropriate amount for a dinner of two, someone else makes their mortgage, another eats for a week or two and for someone it's a windfall.

[astrostu]

That would require a budget (dollar amount) for a reasonable suggestion.

One person may consider $100 to be a reasonable tip, another an appropriate amount for a dinner of two, someone else makes their mortgage, another eats for a week or two and for someone it's a windfall.

Budget's around $200-500 (at least that's what he told me - see the first post).


So, while I could send Dad an e-mail, I'll just post here to add to the discussion. I didn't actually know the details until he posted here a few hours ago. I agree that you're looking at lenses that are too long for general-purpose. My first lens was the 18-55mm kit lens that came with my Rebel which was a 29-88mm equivalent on the 1.6x crop factor Rebel. That was a fairly decent lens in terms of focal length for general purpose shooting -- especially sight-seeing. I added a second lens awhile later that was the 70-300mm Quantaray (or some such spelling). It was decent enough, but I didn't use it much. I mostly used it on the geology field trip my first year of grad school when we couldn't get very close to things or to stitch several shots together to make a panorama at higher resolution. And some astrophotography, but I don't think he's going to be doing astrophotography in Shanghai.

Now my lenses are 24-70mm, 70-200mm, 400mm, and 35mm. By far the lens that is most often on my camera is the 24-70mm, and you know what I shoot (mostly landscapes and "sight-seeing" type events). It's what I used the entire time at every location when you guys came to visit in May. Even at the two weddings I did, the 24-70mm was used 80% of the time, 20% was split between the 35mm (because it's an f/1.4 vs. f/2.8) and 70-200.

A quick look on Google says that the Nikon D90 has a 1.5x crop factor, very close to the 1.6x on my two Canons.

So, the moral of this is that you should be looking for a zoom lens that starts around the 18-28mm range and ends around the 55-70mm range. Obviously for a few $hundred you're not going to get one with a fixed aperture, but that's alright. I think that people with pro-level gear tend to forget that most people are okay with upping the ISO in low lights with tighter apertures than the advanced hobbyist / semi-pro / pros are.

[mentos_007]

I noticed that you are covering here only higher range of apertures. What about Sigma 18-200 F3.5-6.3 DC? In My country it costs about $300 so I am pretty sure that somewhere in USA it is much cheaper.
Then, with 18 mm he would be able to do landscapes and family snapshopst, while with 200 - portraits and zooms. It is a pretty nice lens for this price.

[Teachdna]

All good responses. I used the Sigma lens many years ago when I was more serious about photography and liked them. However, many factors come into a gift besides sheer practicality. The "name brand" glow that he woud get from receiving a "real" nikon lens outweighs the price/quality-ratio advantages that the Sigma might have.

This has been helpful. When I get a chance sometime today, I'll visit some sites, post another set of possibilities and come back to the Board for some more input.

Thanks.

[ann]

how about a tamron 18-270,

I have seen some images made with this lens and they are very sharp and will give a very long reach on a crop camera body.

[Teachdna]

What does the Board think about the Nikon 24-85mm f/2.8-4.0D IF AF Zoom Nikkor Lens vs the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM Lens?

Both are a bit more than I was planning to spend but either could be done if there is real enthusiasm for either.

Thanks.

[mentos_007]

how about a tamron 18-270,

Right now I am testing Tamron 28-300 and I don't like it...ok photos are nicely sharp, almost no vignietting and rather small aberrations but I hate the way in which the motor driving stabilization and AF works. It is nastly, slow and very loud.

What does the Board think about the Nikon 24-85mm f/2.8-4.0D IF AF Zoom Nikkor Lens vs the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM Lens?

I'd go with Nikon for its biger focal length.

[Teachdna]

Well, after actually handling the lens and thinking about it, I decided that 2 lighter lens made more sense. I ended up getting some Nikkor AF 18-55 and 55-200 with vibration reduction.

Thanks for all your help and suggestions.