Lens conundrum

[Mike D90]

I told myself, when I got this D90, that I was not gonna be a lens collector and was gonna stick with three lenses max.

Well, I can't seem to do it.

I currently have the 50mm AF Nikkor f1.8 D, the 18-55mm AF-s f3.5 DX ED SWM, 28-80mm AF Nikkor f3.5 D and the 55-200mm AF-s DX ED VR SWM.

I was going to sell the 28-80mm D lens but it get such good reviews and I really like it. It produces great images and its fast focus. I like the 18-55mm as well and it is a good bit wider angle than the 28-80mm lens. It gets great reviews also and is supposedly super sharp and closer focusing than other lenses costing more than $1000.

The 50mm D lens is also supposedly one of the best inexpensive lenses Nikon has ever made. The 55-200mm lens is a great lens according to Ken Rockwell. I actually use this lens more than any of my other lenses.

So my conundrum . . .

I guess I will keep all four of these lenses as I paid nearly nothing for them. Two of them came with my camera and I consider them freebies at the price I paid for the package.

What I do want is a good long tele to reach out and grab some bird shots.

Should I get a 1.4x converter or maybe a 2x from Nikon and use my 55-200mm? Or, should I save and get a fixed length 300mm or 400mm (like I will ever be able to afford one of either of these)?

That leaves macro. I have dabbled a good bit with macro back in my film days. I had reverse lenses, stacked lenses and even a focus bellows rail. I loved macro photography and still do. However, I just am not going to get into it that deeply enough to carry all that crap around with me so I want to get a good dedicated true macro lens.

Money . . . I don't have it. It takes a good bit of it to get great lenses. So I will have to make do some other way for now with either cheaper lenses or just wait it out and save money for one.

So what would you guys suggest I do about my lenses? Keep or sell some? Get Nikon glass or go for something more affordable in the macro and telephoto range?

 

[Lawrence]

I love these conundrums - they bring the best out of people. If you really want it you will find a way to get it.
I need to have a conundrum but I am still overcoming the one that got me buying my D5100. I sold some unwanted stuff and bought and sold golf clubs on Trade Me to pay for it. So far it has only cost me about $123.00 - Okay exactly $123.00

 

[SkvLTD]

Sell your 18-55 junker and 55-200. Heck, sell 50D too. Then get 35 1.8G and 70-300 VR if you want something with a reach and you'll be set.

28-80 has crappy aperture without a flash (in darker conditions), 18-55 is just beginner "junker" because it feels real cheap and doesn't offer superb quality, and 55-200 is like 18-55: beginner grade zoom.

35 1.8G is a solid, auto-focus prime with great aperture that's a true 35 field of view on DX (since its made for DX). 28-80 starts at ~40mm field of view, so its worse than the 35 prime. The 80 is ~120mm, but hardly as nifty as 75mm your 50mm ends up being.

70-300 VR is the BEST zoom before game goes pro and into $1500+, and is well worth the street pricing of 3-350. So your 50 is like a 75mm, and 70mm on this zoom is like a 105, which isn't too far off, but much more effective given its range.

If you're trying to do budget "trio" that's completely bang-for-buck, I'd do 35 f1.8G, whatever you own/want that's in 35-105 range, and then 70-300 VR.

 

[Watch72]

From the lens coverage point of view, it seems that the 28-80 could go.
If you are looking at a Macro - perhaps finding a 40mm or 60mm macro to replace your 50mm prime. I guess it will cost more and you need to top up.
​I understand very well the difficulties and discipline needed to keep lens buying to a minimum.
Far too often we are seduced by great photos by others, raving reviews and the smooth marketing pitch by the camera companies. Good luck with your efforts but whatever outcome - put on those lens and go out and make good use of them.

 

[PapaST]

I guess my first question is why give yourself a lens limit, simplicity maybe? Different lenses give so many different perspectives and IQ. To me it's like a golfer saying he's going to play a round with 3 clubs (it's doable but tough). Lenses hold their value well so I look at those purchases as money well spent.

If you're that determined then I would probably keep the 50mm, drop the 18-55 and pick up an 18-105, drop the 55-200 and pick up a 55-300 or 70-300. Use an adapter to reverse the 50mm for macro. YMMV.

 

[skene]

I used to think that way.. Figured I could just get away with an manual 35 1.4, manual 70-300, 18-55, and then picked up a 55-200... Then I started getting into macro photography and picked up the 40 2.8G and then some how more lenses just secretly finding their way into my gear bag....
Sometimes you can't just end up limiting yourself to certain lenses.

 

[pedroj]

Nikon AF ED 300mm F4 is a lens that does great job...

Pick a good one up for about $500....Surfing and bird images taken with this lens in the link below...

Saltwater Surfing - Nikonites Gallery

 

[Geoffc]

The advice I would give if to forget about teleconvertors. They are not cheap and are only suitable for good fast glass.

The 70-300 is great (Including FX) and I understand the 55-300 is pretty good on DX. I've never used one but everybody seems to rave about the 18-105 which is cheap and would replace everything you have. A 35 mm 1.8g would finish it off for a low light prime. This keeps to 3 lenses as well.

 

[Mike D90]

I guess my first question is why give yourself a lens limit, simplicity maybe?

If you're that determined then I would probably keep the 50mm, drop the 18-55 and pick up an 18-105, drop the 55-200 and pick up a 55-300 or 70-300. Use an adapter to reverse the 50mm for macro. YMMV.

I have a tendency to get caught up in thinking too much about what lens, or lenses, I am going to carry with me. I do want it a little more simple for now. I am also on a very very tight budget and I certainly want best bang for my buck.

I do want the best quality lens I can afford though. I hate fooling with shots that will never be good and sharp due to a lens limitation. I don't yet have enough experience to know if it is me or the lens. So I want to cure the lens issue as much as possible.

Still, I love several types of photography and I know that messing with cobbled up setups don't always yield good results.

I need to be able to see progress in my work but I cannot afford a room full of lens selection and honestly I don't want to have to keep and maintain that many lenses.

 

[Mike D90]

I have listed two, actually three, of my lenses on eBay. I decided to sell the AF Nikkor 28-80mm D lens, the AF Nikkor 50mm f1.8 D lens and a kinda ugly old Nikkor 200mm F4.

For now I will just use the AF 18-55mm DX ED lens and the AF 55-200mm DX ED VR lenses. I will just try to get closer to what I am photographing, watch my shutter speeds to ensure no camera shake distortion.

Once I find out what my (hopeful) new job prospect is I will save and buy something nice and fast enough to work better for the birding, or maybe a nice dedicated macro lens.

 

[RON_RIP]

Do not have any long lenses so cannot advise you there but do have the Tokina 35mm 2.8 macro which would kind of kill two birds with one stone for you. I find it to be an awesome lens.

 

[skene]

Shoot what you have till you figure out what the limitations are, and what you really want to photograph.

My wish list on lenses...
12-24 F4 Tokina or 11-16 F2.8 Tokina (Ultra Wide for landscape)
70-200 F2.8 Nikon

Then call it a day and it would round out everything I need.

 

[Lee]

Lenses, like any piece of gear solve a problem. So if a specific lens is a solution to something that none of your other lenses are, you have a basis for at least considering the investment. If you want to zoom in at 250 mm and you have an 18-105 mm lens, I would say you can safely justify a need for a 55- or 70-300mm for example.

Sometimes it is easier to find out what, if anything you are missing by looking at your current habits. Go look through a range of your photos taken with an all purpose lens and take note of what your average focal length is. Take note of times when you are seriously under exposed because you can't/don't want to use a flash. If this happens often, you may need a good mid range fast lens. What do you like to shoot? Do you think you are likely to change your interests in subject matter or type of photography?

There are so many questions you can ask yourself but simply going through what you usually do and making a note of those "Damn! I really need just a bit more ... " moments. If the same problem keeps recurring, you can probably justify a lens or another piece of gear to solve it.

I only did portraits when I started out. Not very good. Actually terrible. I thought I only wanted to do portraits because it was all I had ever really tried. I still like taking photos of my family. But I can't say I'm 'into portrait photography'.

What I'm saying is, your interests are likely to change over time so rather than look at it as buying more and more gear, look at it as adapting to suit your needs at various stages. Just make sure you are disciplined enough to let the stuff go when that purpose is covered by another purchase or is no longer used very much.

 

[adox66]

35 1.8G is a solid, auto-focus prime with great aperture that's a true 35 field of view on DX (since its made for DX). 28-80 starts at ~40mm field of view, so its worse than the 35 prime. The 80 is ~120mm, but hardly as nifty as 75mm your 50mm ends up being.

Isnt this incorrect? A 35mm lens on a dx body is actually a field of view of approx 52mm. Being a dx or fx lens doesn't change this.

 

[Whiskeyman]

Isnt this incorrect? A 35mm lens on a dx body is actually a field of view of approx 52mm. Being a dx or fx lens doesn't change this.

You are correct. A 35mm focal length is a 35mm focal length. An object from any lens with this focal length will occupy the same area on a sensor, whether it is an FX or DX. The issue is that with a DX sensor, you run out of room on the sensor before you do do on an FX sensor. With a DX lens on an FX sensor, you run out of image before you run out of sensor.

​WM

 

[gqtuazon]

What I'm saying is, your interests are likely to change over time so rather than look at it as buying more and more gear, look at it as adapting to suit your needs at various stages. Just make sure you are disciplined enough to let the stuff go when that purpose is covered by another purchase or is no longer used very much.

I am definitely not disciplined since it is easier said than done. How can you let go on a good lens? Most of my equipment are not used and abused.


Sent from my iPhone.

 

[Lee]

I am definitely not disciplined since it is easier said than done. How can you let go on a good lens? Most of my equipment are not used and abused. Sent from my iPhone.

I agree that it's never easy to let a lens go but a good lens that is rarely used, is an investment in another one that could be used regularly , tied up in a camera bag.

 

[gqtuazon]

I agree that it's never easy to let a lens go but a good lens that is rarely used, is an investment in another one that could be used regularly , tied up in a camera bag.

Lee - I came up with a different approach on the lack of use with my lenses.

From now on, I will treat them as part of my wardrobe. Some will get worn or used for general purposes, casual, and there are some will be used for special events / purpose. So, just like with any other clothes or accessories, it is ok if they are not put into action that often. Does that make sense to keep em?

 

[Lee]

Lee - I came up with a different approach on the lack of use with my lenses.

From now on, I will treat them as part of my wardrobe. Some will get worn or used for general purposes, casual, and there are some will be used for special events / purpose. So, just like with any other clothes or accessories, it is ok if they are not put into action that often. Does that make sense to keep em?

Now Glenn, I've had to work very hard at self-brainwashing to ensure that I do not become a photography gear hoarder and I think it's so not cool if you come along and unravel all my years of hard work I've invested to ensure that I am physically able to lift my camera bag in two posts!

 

[Whiskeyman]

Now Glenn, I've had to work very hard at self-brainwashing to ensure that I do not become a photography gear hoarder and I think it's so not cool if you come along and unravel all my years of hard work I've invested to ensure that I am physically able to lift my camera bag in two posts!

What?!!!! You sound as though you only have one camera bag! You get extra cases and bags so you don't have to lug all of your equipment with you every time you take any of it!!

At least that's what I've told my wife, who has also trained me to believe that she needs three rooms of our home for her quilting and sewing.

WM