what lenses would i need...

davdav

New member
Hi all,
I've just treated myself to a D7000 with kit 18-105 lens. what lenses would you recommend for landscape/ nature/ architecture.... wide, tele, macro etc?! or would the kit lens be ok? I've read that a 10-24, 35 and an 18-300 would make a decent lens kit. nikon lenses are/can be mega bucks, would the slightly cheaper sigma/tamron lenses make that much difference to quality etc..
many thanks for any ideas/ recommendations..:confused:
Davdav.
 

Pretzel

Senior Member
Same questions as Sparky... YOU, as the shooter, determine what focal lengths you would need for what you do. Wide angle landscape/nature/architecture, or up close and personal?
 

singlerosa_RIP

Senior Member
My son bought a 5300 with the 18-140 a few months back and asked me what other lenses he should buy. I told him to get used to the camera and lens he bought before considering any more lenses. I did, however, lend him a 70-300 to take on vacation.

But since you ask, a prime is always nice, so a 35 or 50 would be good. And a macro in the 100-105 range is great for flowers, bugs, etc.. The Nikon 70-300 is a sweet lens is you want more reach.

Good luck and happy shooting.
 

davdav

New member
a little bit of both really, i think, but i guess that's because i'm to used to my fuji hs20 exr bridge. i was thinking of maybe a nikkor 18-140 and sigma 150-500 with a decent macro lens and/or a fisheye lens. more multi purpose lenses than job specific, kind of thing...
 

§am

Senior Member
TBH if you have the 18-105 then the 18-140 is probably not needed as you're only getting 35mm extra reach so to speak, and the cost of the lens could be put towards your 150-500 Sigma instead

Put your 18-105 at 35mm & 50mm and see which you prefer if you're after a prime.
 

J-see

Senior Member
Shoot some thousand with the kit, have fun doing that. Then look at the photos you like most or liked most shooting. Check their focal length. If you think the lens does not perform well enough there or could not do what you wanted; that's what you need.
 

garp65

New member
Like you I bought a d7000 with 18-105 as a kit lens. My main interest is landscape photography and a found I wanted to go wider than the 18-105 allowed. After a lot of research I got the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 primarily because I lacked funding for the Nikon equivalent. I wanted a wide and fast lens at a good price. I now use it I estimate 90 of the time, I have a number of other lenses but this is my go to.


Paul
 

traceyjj

Senior Member
I have a "superzoom" for my camera (28-300) and I intend shooting with it for at least 6 months (but hopefully 12 months) before I make any deicsions about what I want. Benefits are that I can be saving the money for a couple of good lenses, and I will only have to buy the lenses I feel I need (it also means when I go on holiday I will only need to take one lens as I intend keeping this lens too :) ). Drawbacks is that the lens isnt as high a quality as the other lenses I will eventually buy...
 

SkvLTD

Senior Member
Only get what you feel you NEED for specific things. IF anything and IF macro is something you'd want to dabble with, an older tokina/tamron 90/100mm would be a decent purchase and give you what your kit simply cannot do.

Maybe the 35/1.8 if you shoot quite a bit at night.
 

kratos

Senior Member
you sound much like me... When I first bought it, I wanted to cover all basic focals before I even started shooting.
Although trying the kit lense first for 1K-2K shots is the practical approach, sometimes we just want to get ahead of ourselves (too eager and too excited).

If you still want to check other lenses, start noting signatures of senior members (with their gears) in this forum. It will give you some idea of popular lenses :p
But I agree with the opinion that you should first get used to the kit lense.
 

aroy

Senior Member
The new 18-55 is very nice lense. As long as there is enough light and you are below ISO 400, I use it for most work. For wide aperture work a 35mm F1.8 DX is ideal. For long range and macro a 105mm or 90mm macro will do,
 

gary135r

Senior Member
All things being equal, I've read the Tonika might out perform the Nikon. Anyway, It's after the holidays so I can start experimenting with my new toys
 

hrstrat57

Senior Member
If you see a deal on either a Nikkor 35 F/1.8 AF DX or a Nikkor 50 G F/1.8 grab and put in the drawer. Everyone needs a fast piece of kit, everyone.

Meanwhile shoot your current setup and enjoy!

I believe the D7000 as with the D7100 allows you to consider Nikkor AF D glass (older but still outstanding) as you progress and develop NAS.

Read these forums, see what many of our fine posters shoot with, will give you many ideas.....most of what you need to know has been discussed here even during my short stay, this is a wonderful place.

Search youtube for tutorials there is solid gold there too...especially love Moose Peterson!
 

J-see

Senior Member
If you see a deal on either a Nikkor 35 F/1.8 AF DX or a Nikkor 50 G F/1.8 grab and put in the drawer.

This is funny. I didn't know there was a separate 35mm for the DX. I ordered it when I used the D3300 and paid the couple of bucks it costs but mine is actually the 1.8G ED version. It seems someone made a mistake but I ain't complaining.
 

hrstrat57

Senior Member
This is funny. I didn't know there was a separate 35mm for the DX. I ordered it when I used the D3300 and paid the couple of bucks it costs but mine is actually the 1.8G ED version. It seems someone made a mistake but I ain't complaining.

If you have this:
AF-S NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G ED lens | DSLR lenses from Nikon

I am very jealous, I have never seen one in the flesh......supposed to be sweetness!!

I was referring to this:
AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G from Nikon
$400 less list price, but I would rather have yours!!

( I have been hunting for the G FX F/1.8 forget it, no luck the DX are on Craigslist all the time for peanuts, no good with my D700)
 

J-see

Senior Member
If you have this:
AF-S NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G ED lens | DSLR lenses from Nikon

I am very jealous, I have never seen one in the flesh......supposed to be sweetness!!

That's mine indeed. I ordered the 35mm when I decided not to upgrade to FX. That didn't last long but anyways, I remember the shop-owner mentioning he had to order the one compatible with FX. I bought all others with FX in mind. I didn't respond and wondered what the hell he was talking about since I didn't know there was more than one. I paid the price of the DX, of that I'm sure and was surprised the lens was pretty huge for a DX 35mm. I forgot about it and not much after switched to the D750.

It's only now while reading this I realize the profit I made that day. I now realize too I can no longer advise it as a cheap lens for FX since it ain't that cheap after all.
 

J-see

Senior Member
@J-see that lens must be incredible on the D750!!!!!

I'll have to check. I didn't really need it when I bought it but thinking it was cheap, I'd decided to get one just in case. I've been shooting with it some time back and it's sharp but I wouldn't know how it compares to others.

I just checked the stats. It's a bit sharper than the 50mm 1.8G but not much. About the same as my 200mm and the Samyangs. Those are all pretty sharp.

The Sigma 1.4 seems to be a bit sharper and tops the list of the 35mm primes.
 
Last edited:
Top