New D5000: Second Lens?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RWil85, Aug 26, 2010.

  1. RWil85 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2010
    #1
    I bought a D5000 kit that came with the standard "AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR" lens..

    I was wondering, what would be a logical choice if I were to make a second lens purchase?
     
  2. ManhattanPrjct macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    #2
  3. RWil85 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2010
    #3
    well, you batted .500 on that...that advice is veryyyyy sound; however, not very practical hahaha
     
  4. RWil85 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2010
    #4
    Sorry, accidentally replied again and don't know how to delete this..lol
     
  5. ManhattanPrjct macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    #5
    Shoot with your lens for a while. After a while, check out the 55-200 or the new 55-300 if you need range, or a wider angle if that's your thing. Both are logical, just depends on you and your own style.
     
  6. Bodhi395 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2008
    #6
    Good question, I just bought a D5000 too, and was thinking that eventually I would like to get a second lens. I was looking and the 55-200 seemed like a good choice to me, since it wasn't that expensive, and wasn't too big.

    I agree that you should wait a bit and shoot with the included lens, I think that will give you a good idea what that lens is lacking and what you would like out of a second lens. That's what I'm going to do.
     
  7. MattsxB macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    #7
    I have the Nikon D5000 as well and I recently purchased the Tamron 18-200 for $230 after rebate which the check came in 3 weeks after I sent in for it.

    I have the nikon 18-55vr and 55-200vr lenes as well but I was getting tired of changing lenses and hauling them around.

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...AF014NII_700_18_200mm_f_3_5_6_3_XR_Di_II.html

    For the money it was a great buy.

    If I had the extra money for the Nikon 18-200 I would have bought it at the time.
     
  8. steviem macrumors 68020

    steviem

    Joined:
    May 26, 2006
    Location:
    New York, Baby!
    #8
    55 or 70-200 would be a good complementary lens. Then after a couple of thousand RAW files under your belt, you can see the focal ranges you shoot in most, whether you have photos at 18mm wishing they were sharper or wishing you had a wider angle, if you have photos at 40-60mm that aren't as good as they could be because your flash fired, if you tried some close ups but wish they were more detailed.
     
  9. OreoCookie macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Location:
    Sendai, Japan
    #9
    I would get a 35 mm f/1.8 Nikkor. If you have money left over, get an SB-600 flash.
     
  10. a.jfred macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 28, 2010
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    #10
    I'm going to second the "shoot with what you have for a while, first" argument, particularly if you're new(ish) to photography. What do you like to shoot? Landscapes? People? Macro? What area of your zoom do you tend to stay (18? 55? Somewhere in between?)?

    Once you've figured all that out, you'll be in a better spot to figure out which second lens to get. If you're looking for more distance, go with a bigger zoom. If you want better close-up (and/or low-light) capabilities, then go for a fast Prime. A Prime lens will probably cost you more than a zoom, but it's well worth it (IMNSHO).

    I bought my camera with 2 kit lenses - a 14-45mm and a 40-150mm lens; I shot with the 14-45 for a while, and realized I do mostly close-up work at the 45mm end of the lens. I then bought a set of close-up filters to play with, and realized I love Macro work, so I broke down and bought my 105mm Macro lens.

    It almost never leaves my camera.

    Time from camera purchase to Macro lens purchase: 10 months. No sense in buying extra glass I'm not going to end up using. For that matter, I'm probably going to (try to) sell the 40-150mm lens, because I purchased a 70-300mm lens for the extra range (and even that, I seldom use).
     
  11. Nordichund macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Location:
    Oslo, Norway
    #11
    I also back the "shoot with what you have for a while, first".
    I remember when I bought my camera I thought I would prefer a good zoom lens for things far away, but it turned out that I found I enjoyed taking landscape and photos of city streets and my 2nd lens was a quality wide-angle zoom.
     
  12. M-5 macrumors 65816

    M-5

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    #12
    I purchased my D5000 last year online body-only and added the 35mm 1.8 to it. I chose this lens because it offers a really wide aperture that gives nice background blur, and it allows me to shoot in low-light conditions better. It's a prime lens however, so there is no zoom, but you can always zoom with your feet, and it allows you to practice actually moving the camera to frame your subjects and gain a better perspective of what you're shooting. And this lens is also really inexpensive!

    I'm now looking for a nice prime wide-angle lens though, because the 35mm 1.8 isn't wide enough, especially on a crop-body. I might eventually purchase a nice zoom lens with a large aperture, but that will most definitely be down the road when I have money to spare on such a thing, because I'm sure it's going to be a costly upgrade.
     
  13. npropes macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2010
    #13
    Shoot with the kit lens for a while.

    If you're shooting at 55mm most of them time, then the 55-200mm VR lens could help you extend your range. If you're shooting in lower light, the 35mm f/1.8 is great. If you're spread through the 18-55mm then the SB-400 flash could help you with indoor shots.

    How much are you wanting to spend is also a key factor. If you're shooting a lot of photos at 18mm, then 10-24mm NIKKOR is fabulous. I find that I leave it on my camera most of the time. The only drawback is the $800 pricetag.

    For starting out, I'd recommend sticking with your kit lens. If you want an all-in-one option, get an 18-200mm and pick up either the SB-400 or SB-600 flash. I prefer using the SB-400 because it does everything that most people need at a cheaper cost and smaller size.
     
  14. neil1980 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2008
    #14
    All a bit vague... really depends on what you want to shoot?

    If you're happy with the kit lens then something like a 55-200 or 70-300 would complement it nicely as a telephoto. Though that of course would be pointless if all you're going to do is shoot portraits or landscapes and stuff.

    Something like a 35mm f/1.8 would be nice but again if your going to shoot motorsport or any sport in fact then you're going to wish you has something with a longer focal length.

    You really need to decide on the type of stuff that you're going to be shooting first, if you don't know that then chances are you will end up regretting it and having to buy another lens.

    Saying that if you get the bug you'll end up with several lenses and bodies anyway
     
  15. RWil85 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2010
    #15
    Thanks for all of the advice, guys..I'll surely shoot around with my kit lens for a while and then judge where I want to go from there - that makes sense..

    as for what I'd like to shoot in the future..I went on vacation and really enjoy shooting landscapes..I will do some shooting of sporting events - both pro and amateur stuff most likely..however, i will also need the camera for indoor family gatherings, etc. - in which case I would need a different lens entirely from the aforementioned two subjects?

    I think my understanding of what lenses are best for what subjects is lacking..the reading continues, haha..
     
  16. talmy macrumors 601

    talmy

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Location:
    Oregon
    #16
    Less than you think. Your 18-55 will do just fine for landscapes. People will suggest an ultrawide-angle zoom to get in more of the scene, but then you lose the details an the picture becomes boring. Ultrawides are better when you want to contrast a close object (think "big rock") with the background, exaggerating the perspective. Indoors you would either want something like the 35mm F1.8 for natural light or a flash unit that you can bounce off the ceiling for gentler lighting. It's the sports that will cost you -- daylight you can get by with a consumer-grade zoom lens (55-200, the new 55-300, or the nice 70-300) but for indoor or night sports you will have problems without spending major dollars.
     

Share This Page