Deciding on new lens, on a limited budget I need help!

Hi All,
Need help.

I am wanting to ditch my Kit 18-105. Ive never been really pleased with the lens and I NEVER use it. I own a 35mm 1.8 and it never comes off my camera. I also have a 50mm. 1.8 which I have never used. I shoot mostly portraits.

I dont really need the zoom portion of the lens and I am wanting something sharp and pretty fast. Problem is, my budget is SMALL. Like under 500 with the sale of my 18-105 included.
It has been suggested that I look into a Nikkor 35-70 2.8 or the Tamron 28-75 2.8. I had read that one of these lenses is capable of some Macro stuff. Im very interested in that.

Can anyone give some insight into these two lenses.... also, let me know if its worth selling my kit lens for, especially considering Ive used the kit lens maybe 4 times...

Can anyone suggest anything else? I know My budget is limiting..... But Its what I have to work with.

I appreciate all your feedback!

mmmmm some strange reading there in a way lol.
But.... Ok the Tamron 28-75 is a superb lens and perfect for portraits covering as it does all the perfect focal lenghths.
its also an FX lens which brings even more advantages. considering the cost, makes this a simple no brainer.
secondly.... if you prefer to use primes..... Get the Tamron 60mm F2 macro.
60mm = 90 on APSC so perfect potrait focal lengh... very fast F2.... pleasing bokeh, superb optical performance, and to top it all off
its a true 1-1 macro offering life size images !
PS... The 28-75 is opticaly superb, and although it has a brilliant close focus ability its not a true macro
and it wont give the same kind of quality a true macro offers at close distances.

So you like sigma better than tamron? I cant seem to find a sigma 28-75 for nikon only canon? No thoughts on the Nikon lens?

I love a prime lens, its mostly what I use, I just wanted to branch out a little bit, and I hate having these lenses that I dont like sitting in my back when I could sell it, and get something that I would like and use.

Do you think its wise to sell the 18-105?

aaaagh nooooo sorry its me lol Blush... i meant to write Tamron !!!!!

the 18-105 is actualy a cracking lens performance wise and it beats the competition easily, even with lenses costint 3 times the price.
All it lacks is a wide apreture. 18-135 is the same... longer reach no VR, but stunning IQ.
the best middle ground is the often overlooked 18-70 F3.5-4.5 Nikon lens.
The 18-70 is better built, silent and very fast foccusing, metal coupling ring, faster and to top it off has a degree of weatherproofing seals.

Just Looking for something a little faster than the 18-105... Do you think the tamron is a better lens than the 18-105? Does anyone?

I would NEVER sell or get rid of my 18-105. For the money, and what it does, it's a great lens. It covers a lot of focal ranges, and I don't really care if it's blazing fast or not. Mine seems fast enough for me, so I tend to use it a lot. And considering your budget, sounds like you have champagne taste on Kool Aid money!

Possibly I do Jack.
I just know I have a lens in my bag that NEVER sees any use. And Im not knocking the lens, Im sure its great. Just not for my uses. My Primes are never off my camera. I hate to keep it there without using it, and I just wanted to see if anyone thought that I could Get a lens that I may use more, for the same kind of money. I know I cant afford a 1k lens and Im not looking in that area. However, these two lenses I mentioned seem around my budget. Thats why im trying to get some opinions on them from someone who knows.
And who better to ask than you guys!

fotojack said:

I would NEVER sell or get rid of my 18-105. For the money, and what it does, it's a great lens. It covers a lot of focal ranges, and I don't really care if it's blazing fast or not. Mine seems fast enough for me, so I tend to use it a lot. And considering your budget, sounds like you have champagne taste on Kool Aid money!

Click to expand...

You would fall in love with tammy 60 F2
Up until this lens, macros have been a bit slow at either F4 or at best F2.8
A very clever move by Tamron here. A perfect fast portrait lens thats a true macro as well.
I have a 17-50 F2.8 Tamron which is another stunning performer for DX.
The 28-75 loses out a lot on the wide angle end making it less useful as an allround lens.
The Nikon lenses are great performers in IQ but if you want fast Nikon glass you gotta pay dearly.
The fast Nikon 17-55 F2.8 is a great lens but not as amazing as it should be for the cost.
The 18-70 performs as good at the same range and aprature settings.
IQ wise... The tamron is better with the same F2.8... Both the 17-50 and 28-75.
Naturaly, the Nikon is light years ahead in build quality in the pro range though.
I shall be buying the tamron 60 F2 myself when I get around to it.
Ive got 50 F1.4 and 85 1.8.... One too short and one too long... a bit like the three bears lol.
The 60mm F2... justtttt right hehe. Perhaps even more important is it has very nice bokeh.
Where portraits are concerned... forget sharpness... bokeh is more important.
So much so, I recently bought an old 70-210 F4-5.6 D lens for portraits.
The lens is like new and has an almost pro buld quality and look, far exceeding todays none pro stuff.
It just produces the most pleasing bokeh though. Great image quality throughout the range too.
All this for £130 off ebay !!!!!! If you go this route though... just make sure its the D lens.
They made one thats identical but none D. If its a D, It will have a D on the lens.
Same optical quality but the D version focusses twice as fast as none D and the D itself meens it reconises Distance info for flash.

60mm for macro can be too short, specially if you are looking for bugs. For that i'd suggest a 90 or 105mm lens.

Regarding your current set - 35mm and 50mm - and that you use the first one more than the last, i'd rather choose the 18-70 f2-4 Sigma ( if you like landscape the 18mm will be useful) or a 90mm Tamron (great for macro and portrait).

mmmm poss, but then a 60 on APSC is a 90mm which aint that bad. I prefer the added DOF of the shorter lens, since its in short supply
at macro levels. 90mm on full frame is great but on APSC its rather too long at 135mm for portraits.
Nikon do a 40mm macro too, which is also a great lens. This one is too short for bugs and not quite long enough for good portraits though.
And again its only F2.8 whereas the tamron is again a fast F2.

Thanks guys for all of your help.

I really am not that into Macro Photography, I just would like to get more into it. The only reason I mentioned it is because it was mentioned that one of the lenses, I think the NIKKOR 35-70 had a macro switch on it...

Im really just looking for some semi fast glass that I will get more use out of then the dusty 18-105 that is in my bag.

My 28-105mm has a macro switch on it. Works great, too, and is fairly fast focusing. At least it is on my D200.

The AF 90mm f/2.8 macro lens from Tamron is a very nice lens, and less than $500 with free shipping, Amazon.com: Tamron AF 90mm f/2.8 Di SP AF/MF 1:1 Macro Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Electronics. I have it and like it a lot. I just wish it had the VC feature for hand held shots.

It doesn't do macro, but my favorite lens is the Tamron 70-300mm VC lens Amazon.com: Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 SP Di VC USD XLD for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Electronics. This lens is on my camera more than any other. The 90mm macro is second.

The f/1.4 or f/2.8 "fast" lenses are nice, but not as critical with the D7000, as it would be with other bodies because of the excellent high ISO capabilities of the D7000. You still get good bokeh with the 70-300mm lens also.

Why don't you just challenge yourself to use the 35 and 50 as a two lens kit (if you are like me you will find it very hard to get along with a 50 on dx although I love 50 full frame) ???

Buy yourself an old Ai'd 105/2.5 for a $100 bucks off ebay or at KEH and learn to MF...you won't be dissappointed I bet...

Everyone has their opinions as to what the best lens is for this and that. It's such a subjective topic, that it will never be properly answered.....because there IS no answer! We each use the lenses we have for whatever reasons we have. Some prefer primes, some prefer zooms, and on and on and on. It will never end.

I would add anytime you are talking limited budget (which is usually the case for me) you probably oughtta just use what you have and save until you can get something real good...many times most people haven't squeezed all of the juice out of there old lenses they are just lusting after a new toy or whatever...I do it myself...it is all evil I tell you! LOL

My advice is to buy second hand. Craigslist, ebay, Kijiji (Canada) etc. You can save quite a few hundred dollars by NOT being the first to buy. You at least will save taxes.

ccoulson said:

Hi All,
Need help.

I am wanting to ditch my Kit 18-105. Ive never been really pleased with the lens and I NEVER use it. I own a 35mm 1.8 and it never comes off my camera. I also have a 50mm. 1.8 which I have never used. I shoot mostly portraits.

I dont really need the zoom portion of the lens and I am wanting something sharp and pretty fast.

Click to expand...

If you never use your 50mm and insist on selling your 18-105, don't need zoom and take portraits, why not sell the 18-105 and the 50mm and buy the 85mm 1.8. You have your 35mm for day to day shots and the 85mm is a great portrait lens.

For $500 though you could get the 85mm 1.8g and still keep the 50mm just in case, 35mm, 50mm and 85mm gives you three fast sharp lenses.

Thanks Guys.
The thing is.. Is that I dont need a Long zoom, But Id like a little bit of range, and I dont really care about Macro if its included on the lens thats great.

I really appreciate everyones help and suggestions