Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lenses
Telephoto
Lens conundrum
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mike D90" data-source="post: 213889" data-attributes="member: 17556"><p>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.</p><p></p><p>Well, I can't seem to do it.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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 <em>super sharp</em> and closer focusing than other lenses costing more than $1000.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>So my conundrum . . .</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>What I do want is a good long tele to reach out and grab some bird shots.</p><p></p><p>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)?</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mike D90, post: 213889, member: 17556"] 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 [I]super sharp[/I] 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? [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Lenses
Telephoto
Lens conundrum
Top
