Noob lens choice advice please

Hi

After not getting my head bitten-off in the "introductions" section, I'm feeling brave enough to dip my toe in the real forum!

My experience dried up around 25 years ago when my last 2 cameras were a Canon A1 & Canon EOS 10. Both 35mm. I'd like to go the Nikon route this time around & I like to stick to Nikon glass. I have the bug & feel inspired again. I'm fairly experienced taking photos, but the Digital camera world is mostly new to me. Interests are landscapes, macro, wildlife, general walkabout & outdoor character portrait.

I'm far away from any camera shop so have to base my purchases on good advice & homework. Budget is £2k, I can stretch to £2.5k.

Suggested kit:
D7100 body (I'm happy to wait until September in case a D7200 is announced)
Landscapes: 10-24mm zoom
Walkabout/Wildlife/Portrait: 18-200mm zoom OR 18-300mm zoom
Macro: 85mm micro

I don't mind the overlap in lens focal lengths.

Walkabout: I was looking at the 18-200mm & missed the new 18-300mm zoom. This lens is 15g lighter & only about 3mm physically longer than the 18-200, yet only £44 more expensive. Am I missing something here, or is this a no-brainer? Obviously, the 300mm end would be nice for wildlife.

My old Canon 35mm walkabout lens was a 35-135mm. Total weight was 1074g. Total weight of the new possible walkabout is 1315g.

What is your favorite type of subject? What do like to shoot the most? I would start with that type of lens first. For an example, say your favorite type of shots was macro. Then I would suggest skipping the 85mm micro and get the nikkor AF 105mm F/2.8 micro D lens instead, since it is a better lens in my opinion that will give you super sharp photos at a reasonable price.
Trying to buy a complete kit all at once on a budget, may leave you feeling unsatisfied with some if not all your lens choices. Also when considering a wildlife lens your likely going to want a lens that will go up to 400mm or better, which I learned was the case for me. Anyway a good wildlife lens can be pretty costly even used. I got lucky I think to get a Nikkor AF 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 vr ed D lens for $647.00 and the prices go up from there on these wildlife lenses.

Anyway you get the idea. It's better to have a couple great lenses than to have several less than great lenses you end up unsatisfied with.

That sounds like a pretty good budget to me.
If you are going to wait for the possibility of a D7200 being launched the price of that will clearly determine what you have to spend on glass.
The 18-140mm combo that nikonpup mentions sounds like an excellent idea. I have the 18-105mm on my D5100 and love it. For extra reach I have the 70-300 which is nice but had I been a bit more patient I would definitely have bought something faster and tending toward the 400mm top end. Live and learn but at my age how long can I be patient for?
And the 105mm as suggested by Bill seems to be a very popular lens on this forum
Macro is not something I have any experience with.
Lots of examples and suggestions on here and you aren't in a hurry so look around and ask specific shooters pacific questions. Guys and gals very helpful.

Here's what I would do if I were you given your budget, stretch- D610 w/ 24-85mm VR. It will feel much more like your old SLRs being a full frame, and the photo quality will be superb. If you feel the need for a more tele lens or a macro, add those as you go. Picking up lesser glass and lesser body just to own more glass for the same price when you can outright afford a better option is just silly.

For landscapes, get a Dolcia tripod as they have a nice pan head and horizontal/vertican stitch your landscapes if they won't fit into 24mm frame. Having that super-wide isn't the best best option for these IMO.

Thank you all for your help, it's been an interesting read.

Several seem to be suggesting going for FX glass for better quality. Going into this initially, I must admit that I assumed that ANY Nikon glass was going to be superb. Perhaps not? So I need to figure if DX is good enough for me, or whether I should go for FX. If I go for FX glass, then I may as well go for an FX body too? I'm not sure how to figure that out.

Favourite subject matter is Landscapes & Macro. Covering the first two is essential. Then Wildlife, Walkabout & Portrait.

About a walkabout lens, which to me should be small & light. An 18-55mm is 195g, against 18-105mm at 420g & 18-140mm at 490g. It seems that getting a 490g walkabout - I may as well use an 18-200mm at 565g? Does that make any sense?

Biscuit said:

Hi

After not getting my head bitten-off in the "introductions" section, I'm feeling brave enough to dip my toe in the real forum!

My experience dried up around 25 years ago when my last 2 cameras were a Canon A1 & Canon EOS 10. Both 35mm. I'd like to go the Nikon route this time around & I like to stick to Nikon glass. I have the bug & feel inspired again. I'm fairly experienced taking photos, but the Digital camera world is mostly new to me. Interests are landscapes, macro, wildlife, general walkabout & outdoor character portrait.

I'm far away from any camera shop so have to base my purchases on good advice & homework. Budget is £2k, I can stretch to £2.5k.

Suggested kit:
D7100 body (I'm happy to wait until September in case a D7200 is announced)
Landscapes: 10-24mm zoom
Walkabout/Wildlife/Portrait: 18-200mm zoom OR 18-300mm zoom
Macro: 85mm micro

I don't mind the overlap in lens focal lengths.

Walkabout: I was looking at the 18-200mm & missed the new 18-300mm zoom. This lens is 15g lighter & only about 3mm physically longer than the 18-200, yet only £44 more expensive. Am I missing something here, or is this a no-brainer? Obviously, the 300mm end would be nice for wildlife.

My old Canon 35mm walkabout lens was a 35-135mm. Total weight was 1074g. Total weight of the new possible walkabout is 1315g.

Click to expand...

You may want to consider the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 which very sharp. You can view photos I posted in the D7000 Forum under the "Your Best D7000 Photos" thread. I have no complaints with the Sigma and the price is very good.

Biscuit said:

Thank you all for your help, it's been an interesting read.

Several seem to be suggesting going for FX glass for better quality. Going into this initially, I must admit that I assumed that ANY Nikon glass was going to be superb. Perhaps not? So I need to figure if DX is good enough for me, or whether I should go for FX. If I go for FX glass, then I may as well go for an FX body too? I'm not sure how to figure that out.

Favourite subject matter is Landscapes & Macro. Covering the first two is essential. Then Wildlife, Walkabout & Portrait.

Click to expand...

Not all Nikon (and for that matter Canon/Pentax/Zeiss etc) are excellent. Some are good, some average and some pretty bad. Every manufacturer has a lemon or two. I suggest that you concentrate on the FX glass first. Read up reviews and for comparison, use DXO lense comparison. Even if DXO may not suit in absolute evaluation, they are spot on when comparing lenses.

For both Landscape and Macro, you need
. Well corrected lenses. APO will give no/low CA and can be used at higher F stops compared to those lenses which have CA.
. Edge to edge sharpness at high F stops. Again DXO will help you compare relative sharpness of two or more lenses. Pay heed to the CA and distortion figures also.
. An FX sensor will have "Wider" FOV, so you need less wide lenses. The price difference between D7100 and D610 is not all that much, but you gain a wider sensor and ability to meter with older AIS lenses, which for landscape and macro still hold their own optically against the modern AF lenses.

So either you jump straight into FX bandwagon, or you can start with the D3300 + 18-55 kit lense and then as and when finances permit add FX lenses and/or get the D610. The D3300+kit lense is really an inexpensive rig (less than $470 in India) which is extremely light with good battery life. It is as basic a DSLR as you can get today, with one of the best DX sensors. Its IQ is as good as the higher end models, but there are no extra knobs or features. If you are used to old style SLR you will love it. When you get an FX body, you can keep is as a backup body or use it with long telephotos for wild life shots.

Just check the D3300 shots in this forum to get an idea of what it can deliver.

Though the macro lens I recommended is a FX lens it will work great on a D7100. The cropped sensor of DX cameras work very well for macro.
I'm not very experience in landscapes yet, and I haven't bought a good landscape lens yet. So other can advise you much better, though I know there are two or three great landscape lenses for DX that are not too too bad in price.

Biscuit said:

Thank you all for your help, it's been an interesting read.

Several seem to be suggesting going for FX glass for better quality. Going into this initially, I must admit that I assumed that ANY Nikon glass was going to be superb. Perhaps not? So I need to figure if DX is good enough for me, or whether I should go for FX. If I go for FX glass, then I may as well go for an FX body too? I'm not sure how to figure that out.

Favourite subject matter is Landscapes & Macro. Covering the first two is essential. Then Wildlife, Walkabout & Portrait.

About a walkabout lens, which to me should be small & light. An 18-55mm is 195g, against 18-105mm at 420g & 18-140mm at 490g. It seems that getting a 490g walkabout - I may as well use an 18-200mm at 565g? Does that make any sense?

Click to expand...

Biscuit said:

Thank you all for your help, it's been an interesting read.

Several seem to be suggesting going for FX glass for better quality. Going into this initially, I must admit that I assumed that ANY Nikon glass was going to be superb. Perhaps not? So I need to figure if DX is good enough for me, or whether I should go for FX. If I go for FX glass, then I may as well go for an FX body too? I'm not sure how to figure that out.

Favourite subject matter is Landscapes & Macro. Covering the first two is essential. Then Wildlife, Walkabout & Portrait.

About a walkabout lens, which to me should be small & light. An 18-55mm is 195g, against 18-105mm at 420g & 18-140mm at 490g. It seems that getting a 490g walkabout - I may as well use an 18-200mm at 565g? Does that make any sense?

Click to expand...

The more simple the lens, the better it performs. 18-105 is better than 18-200 because it has far less it needs to do internally to cover its focal range.

Else as everyone else said, go through camera specific forums and look at Best of and such threads for sample shots, then decide what you think you want. And its always better to go w/ FX glass since besides possible future upgrade, they only use the sweet middle of the lens and you get better corner-to-corner sharpness. Plus they're designed more for serious enthusiasts instead of beginners like 18-anything DX kit lenses- lots don't even have a metal mounting plate to the camera body, so gotta be careful not to lean/smack it too hard by accident.

Thank you everyone!

Going straight to FX is now a possibility. I was looking at DX because I was able to get lenses to cover 3 of my photo requirements right out the box - macro, landscape & walkabout/portrait. The issue for me with FX is that I can really only cover 2 of my requirements out of the box due to cost. The price difference between the D7100 to D610 is almost double & effectively is the price of a lens. (GBP799 v GBP1385). Reading about both cameras, it almost seems that the D610 is a lesser camera features-wise, than the D7100. Please put me right if that is not the case. FX does make sense though & I am working hard now to try to find a lens-set which will let me work on my priorities - Landscape & Macro - with hopefully some sort of walkabout.

Due to my location, second-hand is difficult as I would be buying sight-unseen. My general inclination is to go "new".

There was a recent discussion on how "inferior" the D610 is or isn't against the D7100. In my perfect world, I'd own one of each. Most, if not all, of the differences on paper between the D610 and D7100 just don't show up in the images.

But I like the suggestion made earlier...hit a few of the camera specific sub-forums and look at the "best of" threads to see for yourself if something jumps out at ya.

Biscuit said:

Thank you everyone!

Going straight to FX is now a possibility. I was looking at DX because I was able to get lenses to cover 3 of my photo requirements right out the box - macro, landscape & walkabout/portrait. The issue for me with FX is that I can really only cover 2 of my requirements out of the box due to cost. The price difference between the D7100 to D610 is almost double & effectively is the price of a lens. (GBP799 v GBP1385). Reading about both cameras, it almost seems that the D610 is a lesser camera features-wise, than the D7100. Please put me right if that is not the case. FX does make sense though & I am working hard now to try to find a lens-set which will let me work on my priorities - Landscape & Macro - with hopefully some sort of walkabout.

Due to my location, second-hand is difficult as I would be buying sight-unseen. My general inclination is to go "new".

Click to expand...

For Macro, you go to ebay and pick up something decent. Since 7100 and 610 have screw-driven autofocus for older lenses, don't be afraid to dive into those. You'd want mostly manual focus for real macro anyway.

I picked up this guy for about USD200+s/h and can't think of a better macro for the price. Same with some prime lenses - you can get the D versions and they will work just fine, shave the bulk of G versions, etc.

Both for wides and macro, it is best to go with MF lenses. Try KEH if they deliver to your area. Nikon 105mm F2.8, in its three versions (AIS, D and G) is the most VFM macro if you want to keep subject at a distance, else the 60mm is better if you can get close - flowers, or want a CA free linear lense for 1:1 copy work. For landscapes there are a lot of older lenses which are tack sharp corner to corner at F6+. Read up review on them and then try KEH or at the major resellers of pre-owned stuff.

Thanks Aroy, but buying from the US will involve import duties & high carriage charges. SkvLTD, I'd prefer to stick with Nikon lenses but thanks for the suggestion.