Advice on lens after kit please

Greetings Everyone, I am torn between the 1.4/1.8 50mm Prime or the 18-105mm VR. I would like the speed of the Prime, but then again the range of the 18-105 has VR and as a hobbyist I am still learning proper body control etc. to get minimal shake.

I have bought the vertical grip, extra battery (I can Flash for DAYS with the extra battery!) petal hood and 3 filters. I was thinking of the getting a multiplier but do not like what they do to image quality. For those of you that have the 18-105 (which is what I am leaning to) can you chime in please and tell me about your experience with this lens? And for those with a 50mm Prime, what is it about this lens that would make it a good option as a 2nd lens?

One last question concerning flashes, now that the SB400 has been replaced with the SB300, would the SB300 still be a good hobbyist flash or should i try to get the SB400 on an auction site?

I have been shooting lately @50mm with the kit lens to get a good idea of the focal length imaging that the Prime would give me and I like it but have no nothing to compare it too as far as how fast the same picture, quality wise, would be achieved with a Prime, or how much light would be captured by the prime in comparison to the kit. I do know a prime would capture a ton more light but have not run across any comparison shots for example of a shot captured by a prime and the kit at the same focal length to compare them.

Any advice would be appreciated.

RubenAlonzo said:

Greetings Everyone, I am torn between the 1.4/1.8 50mm Prime or the 18-105mm VR. I would like the speed of the Prime, but then again the range of the 18-105 has VR and as a hobbyist I am still learning proper body control etc. to get minimal shake.

I have bought the vertical grip, extra battery (I can Flash for DAYS with the extra battery!) petal hood and 3 filters. I was thinking of the getting a multiplier but do not like what they do to image quality. For those of you that have the 18-105 (which is what I am leaning to) can you chime in please and tell me about your experience with this lens? And for those with a 50mm Prime, what is it about this lens that would make it a good option as a 2nd lens?

One last question concerning flashes, now that the SB400 has been replaced with the SB300, would the SB300 still be a good hobbyist flash or should i try to get the SB400 on an auction site?

I have been shooting lately @50mm with the kit lens to get a good idea of the focal length imaging that the Prime would give me and I like it but have no nothing to compare it too as far as how fast the same picture, quality wise, would be achieved with a Prime, or how much light would be captured by the prime in comparison to the kit. I do know a prime would capture a ton more light but have not run across any comparison shots for example of a shot captured by a prime and the kit at the same focal length to compare them.

Any advice would be appreciated.

Click to expand...

Well I'd say you've chosen two really good lenses to be torn between. There are advantages to both for sure. You don't really mention what kind of shooting you do but if you're using your flash that much I have to wonder if you're mainly shooting indoors (??). It's really hard to suggest one of those lenses over the other, except to say I don't really feel you're getting THAT much more lens the money with f/1.4G over the f/1.8G when it comes to the 50mm. Between those two I'd suggest the f/1.8 but if you've got the cash to burn, go for it! The f/1.4 is a super sweet lens. What the 18-105mm going for it is versatility. A little wide-angle a little zoom... It's a superb walk-about lens that does everything really well. Sorry I can't be of much help with this decision.

Telling us more about what kind of shooting you do might help us better help you make a decision.

As for flash units, I'm a huge fan of the Yongnuo 565ex. A *lot* more power and a *lot* more flexibility than either of those Nikon flashes for a lot less money.

...

Get the 50mm 1.8g and don't look back..You can zoom with your feet..It is a super sharp lens..
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/116582524@N05/12347505704/] [/URL]

I shoot mainly outdoors, my wife's garden, the kids and landscapes etc. not that much indoors unless I am just messing about with settings and learning how the camera behaves in different light situations etc. I think a 50mm prime would rock in almost all situations, but i also like to zoom in (i know that my feet are the best type of zoom, but sometimes walking is not an option to get closer) and so that is the reason for my wanting the 18-105. Thanks for the advice on the flash.

ShootRaw said:

Get the 50mm 1.8g and don't look back..You can zoom with your feet..It is a super sharp lens..

Click to expand...

Man, that is a beautiful shot!

personally on the flash I would go for a good used copy of the sb600 or sb800 .
The 600 is far more flash than the 400 and can be kept forever when you upgrade bodies . It's also a powerhouse .
The sb600's in very good condition usually go for 150- 200 bucks on ebay
the 800 is a true workhorse and can be used as a commander(fire multiple flashes wirelessly) for cameras like yours that don't have a built in commander mode .

The kit 18-105 vr is a great lens .
the only thing bad about it is the fstop at 105mm is f5.6 and at 18 its still a f4 . It likes high iso or flash or bright sun . The vr helps a lot .
a AF-S 35mm f1.8 prime is the equivlent of a "normal lens" on a fx body or 35mm film body. Obviously at f1.8 it works good for no flash or low light .
The IQ is better than the 18-105 but not enough that a snapshot shooter will ever see the difference . Where it shines is in low light .
A 50mm prime f1.8 is going to have a perspective of approximately a 75mm telephoto on a dx body .
for now unless you need a fast lens for low light , you will get more use out of the 18-105 as it is far more versatile than a prime .
That's actually the lens that is on my d7000 quite frequently , my 7100 keeps the 17-55 dx to itself and won't share

RubenAlonzo said:

I shoot mainly outdoors, my wife's garden, the kids and landscapes etc. not that much indoors unless I am just messing about with settings and learning how the camera behaves in different light situations etc. I think a 50mm prime would rock in almost all situations, but i also like to zoom in (i know that my feet are the best type of zoom, but sometimes walking is not an option to get closer) and so that is the reason for my wanting the 18-105. Thanks for the advice on the flash.

Click to expand...

The real answer to your lens question is... Both. Seriously. They're both excellent choices for different reasons and, at some point, you're going to realize you need them both. The 18-105 is more expensive, so you might want to knock that out first, but really my point here is you're going to need both of these lenses. Really. You just are.

Notice I said "need", not "want"...

...

I have the 18-105 and that is the lens that lives on my camera most of the time. For landscape and kids in the garden you really need the extra reach. I have the 18-140 coming in tomorrow and from what I have read it has the same IQ and specs but with just a little extra on the long end.

This is a couple of shots I did last Sunday with the 18-105 and the D7000

Thanks Don, ShootRaw, Mustang and Horoscope Fish, I suspect that by this summer I will own both of them, but it seems that for the moment, as I grow to learning my limitations as well as those of the camera, I will get the 18-105 VR as my first choice. Then a good flash and finally the f/1.8 50mm Prime.

Horoscope Fish said:

The real answer to your lens question is... Both. Seriously. They're both excellent choices for different reasons and, at some point, you're going to realize you need them both. The 18-105 is more expensive, so you might want to knock that out first, but really my point here is you're going to need both of these lenses. Really. You just are.

Notice I said "need", not "want"...

...

Click to expand...

Horoscope is right on the Mark. I have the 16-85 but the 18-105 would have been my next choice. And you are always going to need a 50. Someday you will want to move up to fx and you will still need a 50. If you could live with refurbished you could probably get them both for a reasonable price.

I have the 18-55 and the 55-200 too and that does cover the same thing as the 18-105. the problem is that sometimes you need both of them on at the same time. one shot at 18 and the next you want to zoom in closer. with the 18-55 you can't do that. That is why I went with the 18-105. It is just a good walk around lens. My wife recently just graduated from a CoolPix to a D5100 and I bought her a 18-200 for the same reason. She would have never moved to the better camera if she had to change lenses.

You didn't state what camera you're using. I agree with Pup...... add the 35/1.8 to your 18-55 and 55-200. All 3 lenses are excellent. They will serve 95% of your needs.

Do some research on your present lenses and what you expect to gain by replacing them.

If a purchase is absolutely necessary, look at an ultrawide like the 11-16 or 12-24 Tokina lenses.

As for the SB300, it appears to be a waste of money. The SB400 is a better buy, and there are others to consider.

TedG954 said:

You didn't state what camera you're using. I agree with Pup...... add the 35/1.8 to your 18-55 and 55-200. All 3 lenses are excellent. They will serve 95% of your needs.

Do some research on your present lenses and what you expect to gain by replacing them.

If a purchase is absolutely necessary, look at an ultrawide like the 11-16 or 12-24 Tokina lenses.

As for the SB300, it appears to be a waste of money. The SB400 is a better buy, and there are others to consider.

Click to expand...

He is posting the in the D3100 section so that is what I assume he has.

Don Kuykendall said:

He is posting the in the D3100 section so that is what I assume he has.

Click to expand...

I missed that.

OP: D3100 is a good camera but all the more reason to limit your lens investments. By all means, if you truly believe you'll produce better photos with lenses other than what you already have...... go for it. If the process of physically changing lenses is a problem for you, you might reconsider the whole plan.

(ASSUMING: You've got just the 18-55mm kit lens. If you have the 55-200 or 55-300, skip to the nifty fifty section!!)

The picture quality of the 50mm 1.8G compared to the kit lens... phenomenal. The kit 18-55 is no slouch, but the prime just blows me away more often than the same shot with the kit. Not sure if that helps you with your decision, but it sure did with me.

My first purchase, though, after the 18-55 kit lens, was the 70-300 VR. Got it factory refurbished at a little less than the 18-105 new, and I know it will grow with me no matter what camera body may lay down the road, whereas the 18-105 is DX only. At the time, I was more interested in a quality lens (for that price) that would let me pull things closer to me, and between that lens and the kit lens, I have a lot of "wall worthy" shots. Looking back, I probably wouldn't change this as my first choice.

The nifty fifty is an indispensable lens, though, and I can say that it has helped me develop more as a photographer than the other lenses, as there's no "quick fix" with zoom to get the shot. I will often spend days shooting just the 50mm, as it helps me think about composition, lighting, DOF and the works, and I don't get frustrated with the occasional indoor shots I used to miss or fill with noise (high ISO) anymore. Again, it's a full frame lens, so will grow with me well into the future, and it simply cannot be beaten for "bang for the buck", IMO.

I didn't get my flash until after both lens purchases, and I ended up going with the SB-700 with the "future" in mind as well. Can't tell ya about the other flashes, but this thing kicks tail in every aspect of flash photography!

Tough decision, and it really depends on what you're wanting to do as a photographer. Looking forward to seeing the fruits of your labor after you get the next lens, though!

Count me in the 50mm camp. I bought a D7000 that came with the 18-105mm f3.5-5.6 dx and bought the 50mm f1.8 to replace it when the plastic mount on the kit lens broke (no rough handling - just not great build quality IMO). Nikon wanted more than $100 to fix it. I declined mostly because I liked the 50 so much. I have since bought the part (a new plastic mount) myself and fixed the lens by following a youtube video for about $10, but the 50mm still stays on my lens most of the time.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

I agree that you probably need both. I have the 18-105 and it stays on my camera as my walk about lens. I find it very versatile.
Nice to have tough choices to make

Thanks for all the advice everyone, I appreciate it and really just have to focus and buckle down to one lens purchase for the very near future. I would love to afford the 18-200mm VR II AND the 1.8 Prime but its just not in the budget at the moment. Therefore I will get the 18-105 then the 50, I suspect this would be a good plan for me and help me grow as a hobbyist photographer. Cheers!!

you can get the 1.8 for a little over 100 bucks , i have one and its the best value ,
what lenses do you have now , if you have the 18-55 then i wouldnt buy the 18-105 id be buying the 55-300 if you dont have one its a great lens for the money as well.

im shooting with 18-55 landscapes and 55-300 action etc , i also have the 1.8 50mm for low light
my next lens im torn between a 105mm micro as i do want too shoot macro or a tokina 11-16 wide , really struggling for choice but leaning towards a macro at the moment , in the end ill probably own both which will complete what i need

list the lenses you already have and the type of shooting you will be doing