DSLRUsers.com

i have some cash to burn so want a second lens. so far all i have is the d70 kit lens.

i shoot everything, but like doing portrait stuff (want a real sharp lens), street/photojournalistic, and landscape.

where to start....

any help or suggestions would be great!

thanks

70-200VR

or 70-300 VRII


MATT

12-24

A truely awesome bit of glass!

Dee, one thing you can do is take your memory card to the shop, tell them you're looking at some lenses, throw the lens and memory card on a camera, and snap some shots at different apetures.

If you'd like my 70-300 ED lens I'd sell you it. It's barely been used and it's not bad glass if you want to stretch your money out a little.

I think you should get a 30mm 1.4, or a super wide, but if it's portraits you want, maybe an 85 1.8 or 1.4, or if you want to go crazy, the 70-200 vr (it's a lot of money though and it's huge)

The 85mm 1.8 is a very nice sharp lens, as is the 50mm 1.8. I sold my kit lens to get more primes, and now think I made the wrong decision, having the zoom function is a good, very handy option.

Sure it ain't as sharp as a a prime, but in it's place I now carry a 20mm, 50mm and 85mm, which take up space and weight.

I guess the gist of my rambling is basically try to find a good quality sharp Nikkor lens with a good focal range. The 70-200mm VR is great, really great, but big, heavy, expensive and theres none left in the whole world (apparently).

18-200VR - so far it's received acclaim for its image quality, inspite of strereotypes of image quality from wide zoom lenses.

Budget?
.....Sharp as razor....uhmmmmmm

In my opinion

PJs lenses:
Nikon 17-35 f2.8
Nikon 28-70 f2.8

Less expensive but Nikon
Nikon 35-70 f2.8

Good prize and good lenses
Tamron 28-75 f2.8
Tokina 28-80 f2.8


Portrait:
Nikon 85 f1.4 top one
or Nikon 85 f1.8

Landscape or WA
Tokina 12-24 f4

Fab

for portraiture the shallow depth of field and quality bokeh profuced by the 85mm f/1.4 is excellent

for street reportage guess most photojournalists use the 28-70 f/2.8

a 28-70 2.8 would stay affixed to your camera most of the time, 70-200 vr if you have a deep pocket but would like to make it shallow

Depends on your photography style I guess...

If you have your flash on all the time then the kit lens covers just about everything. The 28-70 would be great for everything but 2.8 is not quite enough for some people like me who only use the flash in specific situations. Getting the 50/1.4 or 1.8 is a great decision for portraiture and other low-light situations. You get the benefit of a light lens, low light usgae, shallow DOF when needed, and good sharpness. Or you can dig up a 35/f2 like I did - fairly cheap as well.

I'd like to try the Sigma 30/1.4 myself. It may also turn out to be something you might use. I just haven't seen any raves about it yet.

You cant go wrong with a 17-35 or 17-55 mm 2.8 lens. If VR is your flavour the 70-200 is an excellent choice or a sigma 70-200 if VR is not required.

wow
some great reviews here...thanks guys!

is the nikon 85mm f/1.4 a pricey lens? anyone have it ?

flipfrog - firstly I do not the either lens.

I have just looked at hksupplies.com ebay website and with shipping costs taken into consideration the costs are:

85/1.4 = US$975 (approx.)

85/1.8 = US$400 (approx.)

flipfrog wrote:wow
some great reviews here...thanks guys!

is the nikon 85mm f/1.4 a pricey lens? anyone have it ?

Best all rounder...50mm F1.4. And it won't break the bank.

Matt. K wrote:Best all rounder...50mm F1.4. And it won't break the bank.

I'll second that! But if the bank is broken then the F1.8 is very good as well.

I have a heap of fun with my 35mm F2.0 supplied by Birdy for around A$400.

The digital equivalent to the standard lens.

How much do you want to spend?