'all in one' d300 lens suggestion

hi and thanks in advance for the great info and advice offered up on this forum...

i began, looking between a d60 and d80 then found out about the d90 coming out soon...

somewhere along the way, i read about the d300, i checked out the d300 and d60 at a local store yesterday, and really liked the d300, its big, heavy, and solid - as you can see, im not too knowledgeable about cameras/photography...

ive been using point and shoots and prior to that, a Canon AE1, but have limited skills and know how regarding cameras.... i think the 300 may be over my head in some respects, but i plan to grow into it...

my question: i plan to save up my pennies and get the 70-300 for a zoom lens,

but for now, i want a lens i can use more generically...

would the 18-135 be a good starter lens where i could get outdoor landscape photos along with indoor pics?

or is there a better more universal 'all in one' type of lens? bearing in mind, im not concerned about zoom since ill be getting the 70-300 after i get used to the camera..

so could someone recommend a good all around lens config for the D300?

thanks

John,

The D300 is an excellent camera but if you'll forgive me for saying this, I think you will be wasting your money to buy one given your admitted level of experience. Also, an excellent camera like that deserves a good quality lens - there is no point buying a good camera and then putting a piece of cheap glass in front of it. I think it would be much wiser to buy something like the D80 (which is still an excellent camera and will still offer plenty of room for you to "grow into") and spend what you save on the camera on good quality lenses. The lenses will be an investment which will stay with you when you ultimately decide the upgrade the camera body to a new model in a few years time.

As regards lenses (regardless of which body you buy), you are likely to find wide angles far more useful than telephotos. The 18-135mm is a very good range for general purposes but this lens does not have image stabilision (or vibration reduction - VR as Nikon call it). This helps stop camera shake and is well worth the extra cost. If you plan on getting the 70-300mm in due course then I would suggest buying the 16-85mm VR in preference to the 18-135mm

--
Confused of Malvern

'The greatest fool can ask more than the wisest man can answer'

If you really like the feel of D300, I think that it's
great to grow into it.
It could be cheaper than a few upgrades, D40-> D60x-> D90-> D300.

Someone said it well. You touched it(D300), it touched
you, it owns you.
The D300 is so nice to hold.
If you buy a cheaper one, you might always want to
upgrade to D300.

I like my 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G DX VR AF-S.

I think most other people here like
the 17-55mm f/2.8 G DX AF-S.
And if you want a future FX camera, then
17-35mm f/2.8 D AF-S.

The 18-135 is a great lens. It's very sharp and very fun. If you're interested, the new Nikon 18-105VR is just coming out this month. It's supposed to be an excellent kit lens with VR.

That all said, for me, one of my favorite walk-around lenses is the 35 f2 prime lens. This lens is on my D300 most of the time while on vacation or walking about town. It focuses quite close and is tack sharp. The fast f2 allows low light to complement the D300's capability.

A three of D300 / 35 f2 samples.







--
Cheers, Craig

The best you can get is 16-85 mm VR but this is more expensive than 70-300 mm VR. Some people like Tamron 17-50 mm f/2.8.

If you gonna use a high end camera with a not so good lens you'll be disappointed. If the body sucks your budget then just take the cheapest 18-55 mm (the non-VR version) that is a good enough lens. 18-135 mm is decent lens, costs half of 16-85 mm VR. You could wait for 18-105 mm VR to see if you like it.
To make good pictures you have three factors:
1. The person that takes the photo (70 %)
2. The lens (25 %)
3. The body (5 %)
Now you got the 5%. With a good lens you reach 30%. The rest is up to you.
--
Victor
Bucuresti, Romania
http://s106.photobucket.com/albums/m268/victor_petcu/
http://picasaweb.google.com/teodor.nitica/

Dear Craig,

Nice photos.

Did you use a tripod?
I also have D300 + 35/2,
but I seldom get very sharp photos.
I mostly shoot indoors...

Kenneth

Guidenet said:

A three of D300 / 35 f2 samples.

Click to expand...

KennethKwok said:

Dear Craig,

Nice photos.

Did you use a tripod?
I also have D300 + 35/2,
but I seldom get very sharp photos.
I mostly shoot indoors...

Click to expand...

I often use a tripod, but not on those 3 photos. The Lady of the Night Orchid I shot at Clyde Butcher's Laborday Muck About in Big Cypress Swamp. Also the image of my gal was shot there. No way to carry a tripod or monopod. The 35's fast f2 made them fairly easy, though the orchid was shot at F10.. bight sunlight.

My Grand-Nephew was moving about and I had to get pretty close with the 35. It's a fun lens, but at F2 you get a pretty thin depth of field, not as thin as my 85 f1.4, but thin enough.

I find the 35 f2 is one of the sharpest lenses I've ever used. Maybe you're using too slow a shutter speed or something might be wrong with the lens. Inside, I use aperture priority and F2. I leave the metal lens hood permently attached as this is such a small light package. I checked my copy for front and back focusing and I needed zero fine tuning. You might want to check yours.

Good luck.
--
Cheers, Craig