PDA

View Full Version : Best lens for D50



jcon
11-10-2005, 04:38 PM
Hello! I have been over at the Panasonic side of this forum for a long time, due to owning an FZ20. I am seriously looking into getting the D50 soon and am just starting my research. I am tryin to find out all I can about the different lenses. I have read that the Nikon 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S DX lense is one of the best. Is this an everyday lens? Would I need to buy 3 different lenses, one for my indoor low light sports shots( Commercial wrestling, WWE), one for outdoor shots, and finally one for portraits? Or would the above lense cover this? As I said I am just starting out with the DSLR research and thank you for your help and understanding of my "newbie" questions!

Balrog
11-10-2005, 05:44 PM
Step 1) Go to the Lens forum
Step 2) Read Rex's Lens Buyers Guide
Step 3) Be enlightened. :D
Step 4) Come back if you have further questions.

EDIT: Here's a link (http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8089) :)

coldrain
11-11-2005, 03:06 AM
And no, the lens you mention is not one of the best, by far. It is just not one if the worst.

jcon
11-11-2005, 12:49 PM
Coldrain, thanks for the reply and info/opinion. I asked because Ken Rockwell seemed to like this lens quite a bit, called it one of the best lenses hes used. Balrog, thanks for the link, it was very insightful. I do have a couple ideas for lenses from that link, thanks! Any personal suggestions from other users would be great:D

coldrain
11-11-2005, 01:17 PM
jcon, that does not mean it is not a nice lens to have. For its price it is a good lens, that will not let you down.

If you are looking for one of the best lenses for that range you are talking about a Nikkor AF-S f2.8 28-70mm IF-ED for instance, or a Nikkor AF-S DX f2.8 17-55mm. But that kind of glass will set you back a cool $2000 and $1500 or so respectivily.

So, you could do worse than getting that D70s kit lens...

jcon
11-11-2005, 02:13 PM
Thanks again coldrain! I appreciate your insight as I am just learning this all now! I guess I need to look alot harder at what my needs are. I am planning on getting the Nikon 50mm F/1.8 lens for sure, then after that I am not sure, A nice zoom would be nice, nothing too expensive as I need to budget myself in the early stages, a lens cmoparable to 10x zoom would be nice but am not sure what they would cost. Thanks again coldrain, much appreciated!

Balrog
11-11-2005, 02:47 PM
For a faster lens in a similar range as the Nikon 18-70 (for indoor low-light sports, or portraits) you could look at the Tamron 28-75/2.8 XR Di; it's very well regarded, and about $400, I think. The problem with it is that you lose the wide end; if that doesn't bother you, it's probably the best choice.
The Sigma 24-70/2.8 is a bit wider; the Sigma 18-50/2.8 even more so, but you give up some reach.

For one of the "10x zoom" types - you're lucky you're a Nikon user: you should check out the newly released Nikon 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 VR; it's on preorder for around $670 i think. Tamron and Sigma have similar lenses for cheaper ($400) but they're slower, and unstabilized. If you can't get that now, save up. "Budgeting" and buying lower-grade lenses always ends up being more expensive than just buying quality to begin with.

coldrain
11-11-2005, 02:57 PM
That Nikkor 50mm f1.8 is a very good idea. For a lens with some reach you can look at the Sigma 18-125mm and 18-200mm, both are well thought of in their field, I think George Riehm has a 18-125 on his 70D and is happy with it.
Not sure, but around 200 for the 18-125 and 400 for the 18-200.

A bit more pricey will be the new Nikkor 18-200 VR one, that will come out in the end of december. It seems to be a nice lens though, image stabilization for about 700$.

The 55-200 nikkor is kind of crap, so do not consider that one... it gets very soft in the corners especially at 200mm, loses contrast too at the longer end (at 55mm it is a very good lens...) and vignets quite strongly.

Another idea may be that Nikkor 18-75 kit lens with a Sigma 70-300mm APO DG version... a big range of 18-300mm together, and not expensive... and a 1:2 macro mode to boot.

jcon
11-11-2005, 03:04 PM
Thank you both for the great suggestions. I have been eyeing the Sigma 18-200 and the yet to be released Nikkor 18-200, its a bit pricey for me to start with the Sigma has caught my eye from both sample images and reviews.

D70FAN
11-11-2005, 04:38 PM
Thank you both for the great suggestions. I have been eyeing the Sigma 18-200 and the yet to be released Nikkor 18-200, its a bit pricey for me to start with the Sigma has caught my eye from both sample images and reviews.

A month ago, I would have said go for the Sigma. Now, I would advise you to save up the extra $270 for the Nikkor. Initial pictures are very (very) good, but we should probably wait for the reviews. It's darned tempting to pre-order and I will probably succumb before December.

Even if the Nikkor (for some weird reason) turns out to be ho-hum, you will have an extra $270 to spend on something else.

NEL
11-11-2005, 06:47 PM
I will change probably to Nikon 18-200VR (mostly because of VR) if it will get good reviews, but the price differense with Sigma is more then twice. Sigma goes for $330.
The difference of $270 sounds little bit too optimistic :)

snapim
11-11-2005, 07:07 PM
Wow- This is worse than buying a new vehicle!!!!! I too am debating on the Sigma 18-200. Is this sufficient for a carry around primary (and only for now). I thought I was doing good with finally making my camera choice- I had no idea there were so many choices. Obviously new to this game, is there a better choice to fit my needs (and learning curve) for family shots/gatherings, outside play and landscapes while backpacking or on the water....and now I'm thinking I should wait for the Nikon18-200? Living in Northern Michigan, I certainly have time before the latter......

Rex914
11-11-2005, 08:09 PM
I will change probably to Nikon 18-200VR (mostly because of VR) if it will get good reviews, but the price differense with Sigma is more then twice. Sigma goes for $330.
The difference of $270 sounds little bit too optimistic :)

Where is it selling for $330? The lowest I've seen anywhere is $350 and most places still sell for the original $400 pricetag.

K1W1
11-12-2005, 03:12 AM
Wow- This is worse than buying a new vehicle!!!!!

Of course it is. Who has an emotional attachment with car for goodness sake. It's a square (ish) steel box that gets you from here to there and back.
A camera on the other hand is held and cradled and has it's lenses changed and its results are post processed. Run out of fuel - call the auto club. Get BGLODed and be without something to caress for days if not weeks.

snapim
11-12-2005, 07:20 AM
Awe, well now I'm even more anticipating my newest arrival! But what about the equipment I'll be sporting on her? What would be the wisest choice if one were to only have one lense to purchase or better yet a budget of $500.

PS I love my vehicle and take very good care of her too, she on the other hand, cradles me.

coldrain
11-12-2005, 07:40 AM
Awe, well now I'm even more anticipating my newest arrival! But what about the equipment I'll be sporting on her? What would be the wisest choice if one were to only have one lense to purchase or better yet a budget of $500.

PS I love my vehicle and take very good care of her too, she on the other hand, cradles me.

That depends on what you are after of course.... $500 can get you the Nikkor 60mm f2.8 D macro lens.

If you want to cover a big range in just one lens, the Sigma 18-200 may be a good choice. You can get a nikkor 50mm f1.8 prime with it for when you need a lightsensitive lens.

If you want to buy more than one lens, a combination of for instance the Nikkor 18-70 f3.5-4.5 G IF-ED D70s kit lens with a Sigma 70-300 APO DG will give you more reach even with an 1:2 macro to boot.
Or that Sigma 70-300 APO DG with a Sigma 18-125mm zoom.

Or you could get a Tokina f4 12-24 wide angle zoom lens (that beats the Nikkor AF-S f4 12-24mm DX G IF-ED which costs over 1000$), if you are after a wide angle lens.

Or the Nikkor 18-70 f3.5-4.5 G IF-ED with a Sigma 50mm f2.8 EX 1:1 macro lens... Or the 50mm macro in combination with the Sigma 18-125mm...

A lot of directions to go in, you first have to decide what you want in lenses. If you spend your 500$ wisely you can get a lot of pleasure from your camera.

snapim
11-12-2005, 08:02 AM
:confused: um,well, thanks....I think this might be another weekend spent on the net in research because I don't really know what I want, theres just too many choices out there. My immediate needs will be for inside family holiday shots- does that narrow anything down for me?

NEL
11-12-2005, 06:13 PM
Where is it selling for $330? The lowest I've seen anywhere is $350 and most places still sell for the original $400 pricetag.

I got one my for myself about 2-3 months ago for $330 from tristatecamera. (I hate doing free advertising here, but I want to answer the question). There are few deals on ebay right now. Off-cause need to look for authorised dealers only and be careful with shipping cost. Some people try to make money on shipping.

K1W1
11-13-2005, 03:56 AM
I don't really know what I want, theres just too many choices out there. My immediate needs will be for inside family holiday shots- does that narrow anything down for me?

Buy the camera body with either the D50 kit 18-55 or D70 kit 18-70 (if you want to spend a bit more and have that choice) lens. Either is a reasonable starter lens with the 18-70 being the better of the two.
Use the camera for a month or two with whichever lens you buy and by then you will have some sort of an idea of what you are actually going to take photos of and what lens you will most use (focal length, apperture, lighting conditons, etc), you may even find that the kit lens is okay for you.
When you have made your final lens decisions AFTER you have used the camera for a while you can always Ebay your first lens to offset the price of the new one.
You cannot decide on a camera body / lens combination by surfing the Internet. You need to have something in your hand and make decisions based on real world applications FOR YOU.

NEL
11-13-2005, 11:37 AM
:confused: um,well, thanks....I think this might be another weekend spent on the net in research because I don't really know what I want, theres just too many choices out there. My immediate needs will be for inside family holiday shots- does that narrow anything down for me?

I had same problem few months ago. Thanks to this forum I made my choise and I am happy with it for now.
For you may be body + 50mm 1.8 would be good. It is good and cheap lens and you won't need to worry about selling it.

jcon
11-14-2005, 03:53 AM
Thanks to all of you who gave suggestions to me for lenses on the D50, I really appreciate the guidance! I have narrowed my list down(i think:o ) to the following lenses:

Nikon 50mm f1.8(deffinate!!)
Nikkor 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF
Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED
Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG

Which of the last 3 would be the best for indoor low light action zoom shots for arenas and such? And would you recommend these lenses? Are they good? Thanks again for all the help!

K1W1
11-14-2005, 04:34 AM
The 50mm Nikkor is effectively a 75mm on a D50.
Scratch the Sigma if you only have one other lens. Effectively it starts at 105mm in 35mm terms so you are never going to get the kids and Grandma in the same frame in her dinning room at Christmas (it is a good lens though IMO).
If you are taking indoor shots of the family the 18-70 is the only one that will give you enough width without you being somewhere down the hall to take a group shot.
As I suggested earlier buy that lens, take actual real world photos and then look at the EXIF data and see what focal lengths you are using most over the course of a month or so. I think you will find that most of your images are in the 18-50 range from what you have said earlier. Then decide what lens suits your style best.
Another thing to remember. The D50 takes great images at 800 or 1600 ISO so you can compensate for a slower lens to a certain degree by cranking up the ISO.