Looking for some advice

Im looking to go from a point and shoot camera to a real camera. Ive pretty much decided Im going to get a Nikon D7000 unless the D7100 comes down in price by the time im ready to buy.

Right now, my plan is to get the camera to take general indoor, and around the yard pictures to get used to the camera. Im choosing this camera because I want better pictures then the Sony Cyber shot we have now. I want more control.

Now that I have the easy part down, now comes the hard part. Choosing lenses. Ive talked to some people, but all they want is to cover the MM range.

Im planning a Vacation to Disney in Florida in November of 2014. So there will be some action shots, Stills, Bright light of the sun, and low light. Im looking to get 1 or 2 lenses to take with me. But I have no ide what they should be. I know the D7000 comes with the 18-105mm lens, but ive read that it can have Image quality issues. And from reading here the camera body is part of the IQ and the glass is the majority of where the IQ comes from.

Thank you in advance for your help.

Smiley

Mr Smiley said:

Im looking to go from a point and shoot camera to a real camera. Ive pretty much decided Im going to get a Nikon D7000 unless the D7100 comes down in price by the time im ready to buy.

Right now, my plan is to get the camera to take general indoor, and around the yard pictures to get used to the camera. Im choosing this camera because I want better pictures then the Sony Cyber shot we have now. I want more control.

Now that I have the easy part down, now comes the hard part. Choosing lenses. Ive talked to some people, but all they want is to cover the MM range.

Im planning a Vacation to Disney in Florida in November of 2014. So there will be some action shots, Stills, Bright light of the sun, and low light. Im looking to get 1 or 2 lenses to take with me. But I have no ide what they should be. I know the D7000 comes with the 18-105mm lens, but ive read that it can have Image quality issues. And from reading here the camera body is part of the IQ and the glass is the majority of where the IQ comes from.

Thank you in advance for your help.

Smiley

Click to expand...

The 18-105mm is a great lens and since it covers such a broad spectrum the question becomes do you want to go with more zoom (I'd suggest something like the 55-200mm or 70-300mm) or do you want to go wider (say an 11-16mm or 10-20mm). Shooting down the middle and going with a faster prime, like an f/1.8 35mm makes no real sense to me here, even though I love a good, fast prime lens. I think you need to decide if you want more zooming or more wide angle; and that's something only you can decide.

Horoscope Fish said:

The 18-105mm is a great lens and since it covers such a broad spectrum the question becomes do you want to go with more zoom (I'd suggest something like the 55-200mm or 70-300mm) or do you want to go wider (say an 11-16mm or 10-20mm). Shooting down the middle and going with a faster prime, like an f/1.8 35mm makes no real sense to me here, even though I love a good, fast prime lens. I think you need to decide if you want more zooming or more wide angle; and that's something only you can decide.

Click to expand...

I know Ill want more zoom, but I dont want IQ to suffer. So its Sounding like the 18-105 is a good lens? I think itll be a good one to start off with. I just dont know what to suppliment it with.

Mr Smiley said:

I know Ill want more zoom, but I dont want IQ to suffer. So its Sounding like the 18-105 is a good lens? I think itll be a good one to start off with. I just dont know what to suppliment it with.

Click to expand...

First of all I want to say I take strong exception to the idea that the camera body has little to do with image quality and that the glass is everything. Sorry, that just does NOT jibe with my experience. Having gone from a Nikon D40 to D5100 to my current D7100 with some of same lenses on all three, my personal experience says the body behind the glass has whole freakin' lot to do with image quality, thank you very much. I meant to say this in my first post and then forgot... So, that being said now...

I love my 18-105mm and so do a lot of other people here. It's the lens that rarely comes off my camera any more. It's a Jack-of-all-Trades sort of lens I wouldn't be without.

If you definitely want more zoom then I'd suggest either the Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED IF AF-S DX VR for about $250 or the larger, but more expensive Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF AF-S VR that goes for around $600. There are less expensive Sigma, Tamron and/or Tokina options as well however.

I would not worry about image quality with the 18-105, especially if you are new to DSLR's. Its really a very nice lens. On Amazon right now the d7k with the 18-105 is only $100 more than the body alone.

I recently got the 18-105 as well as a few others around here. I think everybody is pretty happy. For now I am very happy with the 18-105 on the camera for everyday use. It has more range than the 18-55 and better IQ than my 18-270.

I think if I was going to Disney and keeping it light, I would bring the 18-105mm and the 35mm.

To a degree, lenses can alter the IQ of your images. That was an important consideration back in the days of film cameras but what exactly does that mean in the day of digital cameras and digital darkrooms?
To begin with, a less expensive lenses will have more vignetting, some pincushioning/barrelling, CA and corner softness.
​
1- Vignetting. It can be completely removed in PP, however most people not only keep the vignetting but they increase that vignetting for the effect.
2- Pincushioning/barrelling. Can can be completely removed in PP.
3- CA. I'm sounding like a broken record but it, too, can be removed via PP.
4- Soft corners. Now we've hit the one issue that cannot be address via PP. But as long as you're using a DX camera, soft corners really don't apply to you because the DX sensor is sampling the image right in the so-called "sweet spot", or middle of the image and do not suffer from the corner softness that an FX camera would.

So yes, some less expensive lenses have IQ issues, however, using a DX camera and possessing a thorough understanding of PP, all these issues are rendered moot. All this said, I would recommend you purchase the best lens you can afford and to not worry about any IQ issues because they're really not an issue we photographers need to worry about any longer.

nickt said:

I think if I was going to Disney and keeping it light, I would bring the 18-105mm and the 35mm.

Click to expand...

Agreed. I'd take the 18-105 and a fast 35mm, or wider, and call it good.

It hasn't been mentioned, but I'm a pretty big fan of my 18-200mm VR. It's a a little pricey, a little heavy, and a little soft at 200mm. That said, all non-pro zooms tend to be soft at the extremes and it's remarkably convenient to be able to just take one lens and leave it there. The ISO performance of a D7000 (or D7100) is more than enough to allow the 18-200mm (any by extension the 18-105 and other similar aperture lenses) on indoor shots. I own a few lenses, but if I'm going on a trip I tend to take just my 18-200mm and my 35mm 1.8G.

I've been completely happy with my 18-105. If you check out my gallery, all but two of the images in there were taken with the 18-105. The two that weren't are the purple flowers (Nikon 75-300 f/4.5-5.6) and the Hornet over Saipan (Kodak P&S). My second lens was the 35mm f/1.8G, (~$200) which is a great low-light lens, but you already have that focal length covered with the 18-105. Eventually I realized that I take a lot of my shots at the 18mm end of the 18-105 and sprung for the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 (just under $600), which is also a fantastic lens. I've never been to Disney, but I'd imagine there are some scenes down there that would lend themselves well to a good ultra-wide.

For my zoom I have that old 75-300 that I rarely wind up using. It depends on what you want, but I'd definitely consider a fast prime, particularly for the low-light shots you were talking about.

I'm in agreement with the prior posts. I have the 18-105 and 35 f/1.8, which serve 95% of my requirements, but I don't do bugs or birds.

As was mentioned, most online stores are offering the d7000/18-105 kit for $100 above the D7000 body by itself. Put a 35 f/1.8 with it and you're in for $1200. That's the price of a D7100 body.

Heres what im looking at now, D7000, With the Kit lens of 18-105mm, 35mm f/1.8, and possibly a Tamron 10-24 f/3.5-4.5. That would put me right at my Budget of $1600.

The D7K, kit 18-105, and 35 prime will cover 95% of most people's photo needs. Honestly, the kit 18-105 probably covers most of it, but the 35 prime is so great for its price that it's hard to pass it up.

​I would hold off on the Tamron unless you're absolutely certain you like how it looks and performs and you definitely want/need to get wider than the 18-105 lets you. I don't really like it. I tested it at the shop and found it too soft for my liking when it's wide open. And its wide open isn't terribly wide open. At $500 you should look into the excellent Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 and the solid Nikon 12-24mm. The Tokina would get my vote, but only after determining you really need an ultra-wide.

kirbfucius said:

I would hold off on the Tamron unless you're absolutely certain you like how it looks and performs and you definitely want/need to get wider than the 18-105 lets you. I don't really like it. I tested it at the shop and found it too soft for my liking when it's wide open. And its wide open isn't terribly wide open. At $500 you should look into the excellent Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 and the solid Nikon 12-24mm. The Tokina would get my vote, but only after determining you really need an ultra-wide.

Click to expand...

That's pretty much what all the reviews I've read stated.

I have the Tokina 11-16. I got a good deal used. Very nice lens. But I would hold off for a while on the extra wide and see how it goes for you. Who knows, you may end up wanting nice zoom for wildlife or even a macro. With the 18-105mm and the 35mm you will be off to a great start. I use my 35 a lot indoors without flash.

I have been to Disney a few times with the 18-105mm and it really does a great job. From fireworks pics atop the Bay Lake Tower to pictures of the kids with Mickey as well as food pictures (for the wife's Disney blogging) and I have no complaints. I found that any issues I had with this lens were usually my error and not the lens/camera. The best thing I did with that lens is go into the "set picture control" feature and adjust the sharpening up to +7 (thank you so much Nikonites for that tip!). I do wish I had the 35mm 1.8 though for the indoor shots even though the 18-105 was fine without a flash and everyone said the pictures were great.

co2jae said:

I have been to Disney a few times with the 18-105mm and it really does a great job. From fireworks pics atop the Bay Lake Tower to pictures of the kids with Mickey as well as food pictures (for the wife's Disney blogging) and I have no complaints. I found that any issues I had with this lens were usually my error and not the lens/camera. The best thing I did with that lens is go into the "set picture control" feature and adjust the sharpening up to +7 (thank you so much Nikonites for that tip!). I do wish I had the 35mm 1.8 though for the indoor shots even though the 18-105 was fine without a flash and everyone said the pictures were great.

Click to expand...

Im happy to hear that. Ill stick with the 18-105mm lens and go from there. Right now im putting aside money to get the camera every month, and plan to have the camera within the next six months. That should give me ample time to get used to the camera.

I've got the 18-105 kit lens and have decided to stay with it as my only lens for now. As I get more familar with the camera, I feel like I will be better able to evaluate what additional lenses I will want. Current plan is to someday add something like a 70-300. If I ever decided to move away from the 18-105, I might consider a 16-85.

Mr Smiley said:

Im happy to hear that. Ill stick with the 18-105mm lens and go from there. Right now im putting aside money to get the camera every month, and plan to have the camera within the next six months. That should give me ample time to get used to the camera.

Click to expand...

Just a thought - most major online retailers (all who sell on eBay) offer the PayPal "Buy it Now, Pay later" option. Buy it, six months to pay with no interest charges if you pay it off within the six month period.