Best Lens Combo?

Hi all,

Trying to find the best lens combo for my D90.

For portraits: debating between the Nikon 50mm 1.4, the sigma 30mm 1.4, or the older Nikon 35mm f2.

For General walking around use: the 18-105 kit or what? Is there the "lens to get?" like the old 18-70 lens the came with the D70. everybody raved about that one.

Thanks in advance,
Z

for portraits, i'd take the 50 f1.4...35 f2 seems to be a great 'walkaround' and thinking of buying one for such purpose...

i have the 18-70 and i'd say this is one of the best none VR zooms out there...i'm planning to replace it with the 16-85VR...which i've read is excellent...

cheers,

nr

The 18-105 kit lens should be a good walkaround lens. You could go with an 18-70/28-75 range or the opposite extreme of a Tamron 18-270. Some will argue for a faster lens, but IMO, when out walking around unsure of what if anything you might find to shoot, you need a flexible lens.
--

'A man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick himself up and continue on.'
Winston Churchill

My kit has 18-70, Sigma 10-20, 70-300vr and the 50mm 1.8. I always walk with the 18-70 and the sigma if landscape opportunities are expected. I enjoy having the 50mm around for dinner portraits, low light evenings etc.

This gives me 10mm-300mm total although I find that my 70-300 stays in the bag unless I am specifically going after wildlife.

My two cents...

Cue

Agree, I am using 16-85VR+70-300VR combo on my D80 and I couldn't be happier about it

Marcin
--

cuejones said:

My kit has 18-70, Sigma 10-20, 70-300vr and the 50mm 1.8. I always
walk with the 18-70 and the sigma if landscape opportunities are
expected. I enjoy having the 50mm around for dinner portraits, low
light evenings etc.

This gives me 10mm-300mm total although I find that my 70-300 stays
in the bag unless I am specifically going after wildlife.

My two cents...

Click to expand...

I echo this setup except I have the 18-105VR instead of the 18-70mm. The 18-105VR gets used the most with the other lenses being more 'specialty'. Sigma for landscape and such, 70-300VR for wildlife and 50mm for available light stuff.

--
Stu

.

Zerocool said:

For portraits: debating between the Nikon 50mm 1.4, the sigma 30mm
1.4, or the older Nikon 35mm f2.

Click to expand...

These are all quite short for portraits, though it does depend upon what kind of portraits you're referring to. For a head-and-shoulders portrait, something between 100mm and 200mm is best to reduce distortion of facial features. See this page for a comparison of focal length distortion characteristics:
http://stepheneastwood.com/tutorials/lensdistortion/index.htm

Note that perspective distortion is the same whether the focal length is used on a full-frame or DX camera; crop factor doesn't affect it.

binary_eye said:

Zerocool said:

For portraits: debating between the Nikon 50mm 1.4, the sigma 30mm
1.4, or the older Nikon 35mm f2.

Click to expand...

These are all quite short for portraits, though it does depend upon
what kind of portraits you're referring to. For a head-and-shoulders
portrait, something between 100mm and 200mm is best to reduce
distortion of facial features.

Click to expand...

While the 50mm is OK, and a lot better than 30/35mm for head shots, I
agree with binary_eye that a longer lens would be better.
Why not get a macro in the range of 90mm or more? You will have both
an excellent portrait lens and a macro lens in one.
I have a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Di and it's great, but truth is, ALL dedicated
macro lenses are very good. Just buy whatever happens to be on special

--
Patco
A photograph is more than a bunch of pixels

For head shots the 50mm f 1.4 would be the choice. If you need working room and want to show full body or upper body, then the Sigma 30mm f 1.4 was my choice. When it comes to a walk around lens there are a whole bunch of recent chap entries though I don’t think you can beet the 18-200 VR for convince, range and quality. This lens continues to be in high demand keeping the price above $500 which is what it should cost.

Morris

--



http://qcpages.qc.cuny.edu/~morris/POD

morris said:

For head shots the 50mm f 1.4 would be the choice. If you need
working room and want to show full body or upper body, then the Sigma
30mm f 1.4 was my choice. When it comes to a walk around lens there
are a whole bunch of recent chap entries though I don’t think you can
beet the 18-200 VR for convince, range and quality. This lens
continues to be in high demand keeping the price above $500 which is
what it should cost.

Morris

Click to expand...

Thank you Morris and everyone else for replying to this thread. I too like Zerocoo, am trying to figure out "what is the best lens combo for the D90" and this thread could not have come at a better time for me!

I ordered the D90 body with 18-200 VR lens from B&H on New Years eve and have been in a panic ever since second guessing my decision to purchase this lens. The lens reviews on B&H have been extremely positive (as they are on many other sites) and the person I spoke to at B&H highly recommended it, yet here on DpReview it seems hardly ever mentioned or recommended. That makes me very nervous since I consider these forums and members, one of the best informed on the web and the only one I consistently reference and keep up on since purchasing my Olympus E-10 back in 2001.

I was going to cancel my order at B&H today but have decided to instead ask they place it on-hold for a day or two while I do more research and eagerly follow this thread to see what you all think is the best lens combo for the D90.

Thanks everybody for helping myself, Zerocoo and many others, who are wrestling with this same question!

shalliday said:

I ordered the D90 body with 18-200 VR lens from B&H on New Years eve
and have been in a panic ever since second guessing my decision to
purchase this lens. The lens reviews on B&H have been extremely
positive (as they are on many other sites) and the person I spoke to
at B&H highly recommended it, yet here on DpReview it seems hardly
ever mentioned or recommended. That makes me very nervous since I
consider these forums and members, one of the best informed on the
web and the only one I consistently reference and keep up on since
purchasing my Olympus E-10 back in 2001.

Click to expand...

I think most people here who actually own the 18-200 highly recommend it.
It's really quite good, especially considering the 11x range it covers!
I believe you will be very happy with it :-D

--
Patco
A photograph is more than a bunch of pixels

It all depends on how many lenses you want to carry - you can use just 1 with the 18-200 and get some very good results (many of which have been posted in the forum over the past year) or you can use multiple lenses - such as the 16-85vr and the 70-300vr and get shots that are sharper but with the liability of perhaps missing some shots by needing to suddenly change lenses. The 18-200 is a great all-in-one lens and used within its limitations gives wonderful results. If you start trying to compare it to other more specialized lenses such as the 17-55 and 70-200 or 80-200 of course it will come up short. You need to look at what you are likely to shoot and then decide what lenses fit your requirements. I would guess that even though many have bought other lenses since their initial 18-200vr purchase to use - they still have that lens and use it when they don't want to carry a lot of weight around. That's what I do --

Hi

I'm sure you'll read this advice plenty if you search this forum: Before you buy, work out the range you most shoot in. Check back on your old pics, you'll be surprised. Then if you can manage with a one-lens solution, that's great. But most of us need two lenses to cover the range.

On my D90 and D80 I use 16-85 90% of the time, and have one 70-300VR for the occasional long shot. I never need to go below 16mm.

If you want to see a few 16-85 pics from the D90 taken with minimal PP and no cropping, look at my current thread ' two days in Charnwood'.

Geoff

My 2 lens combo for my D90 is a Tamron 17-50 F/2.8 and a Sigma 50-150 F/2.8. I also carry the a 1.4x TC in a side pocket just in case I want that extra reach. Its a great 2 lens set and fits perfectly into my Lowepro Slingshot 100. I can even fit my Nikkor 50 f/1.8 in the bag if I know I have some really dark shots coming up, but most of the time I just leave it behind.

I love it because this setup is like the FX people that carry a 24-70 and a 70-200 at half the weight and size when you take into account the crop factor of DX bodies. I still don't own a ultra-wide angle yet but I'm spying the Tokina 12-24 F/4 which I could sub into the bag as needed to replace the Tamron.

I did try a Tamron 18-270 VC for a little over a week and couldn't deal with the compromises of a 1 lens solution.

Zerocool said:

For portraits: debating between the Nikon 50mm 1.4, the sigma 30mm
1.4, or the older Nikon 35mm f2.

Click to expand...

I would take a look at the great manual 50mm f/1.8. Plenty of speed, excellent contrast and color. I prefer manual lenses for portraits so I can control how the photo comes together.

Hey, 50mm is pretty good for a "walk around" lens also. Equivalent to an 85mm lens on a film camera, it gives you a great perspectice with excellent control of elements in the photo.

--
'Sacramento' Bruce Conklin

If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words!

CacheValleyBranch said:

I would take a look at the great manual 50mm f/1.8. Plenty of speed,
excellent contrast and color. I prefer manual lenses for portraits
so I can control how the photo comes together.

Click to expand...

There had been several different versions of this manual-focus lens - all of which came out after 1977 when Nikon came out with the Ai indexing feature to meter-couple the lenses. You'd want the old Nikkor Ai version, or the early Nikkor Ai-S version (serial numbered 3xxxxxx). The Series E version and the later Nikkor Ai-S version (serial numbered 4xxxxxx) were optically identical to one another (almost as good as the other two, but a bit more prone to flare and ghosting because they weren't fully multicoated like the 'better' Nikkors), and they were more cheaply made.

After reading everyone's replies multiple times and searching through other related threads, it seems the choice in deciding on the "Best Lens Combo for the D90" or any DSLR for that matter, varies according to one's budget, picture taking preferences/requirements and personal preferences in image quality vs convenience and flexibility. In other words, no shoe fits all.

In this thread and throughout the forums there has been what seems to me, the novice, a number of excellent lens combinations suggested for the D90.

The following Nikon "lens combinations" seem to be most suggested/recommended as a good base kit or all that you need, with possibly one or two other lenses to round out your kit such as the 11-16 and 50mm.

(1) 18-55 DX VR + 55-200 DX VR - very light, cheap, but surprisingly good optical quality

(2) 18-70 DX + 70-300 VR - one step up from the kit above, particularly in build quality

(3) 16-85 DX VR + 70-300 VR

(4) 12-24 + 18-200

(5) 18-200 DX VR - convenient, one-lens-fits-all solution, but the above combos are better optically.

Now putting aside the many individual lens comparisons such as the16-85 vs the 18-70, along with the many other non Nikon lens options, the five Nikon lens combinations listed above give any novice beginner, such as myself, plenty to mull over when deciding (1) what lens combo is right for me? and (2) what glass should be my first purchase? and I can then build from there.

I am leaning towards buying the 18-200 DX VR, as my starter lens since most seem to agree that it makes a great general purpose walk around lens and one which will serve my immediate requirements as a beginner. I used the Olympus E-10 for years (built-in single zoom 35-140mm zoom lens) and while it has some limitations, the camera is capable of producing some very nice photos and I trust with the 18-200 VR lens, the D90 will produce at least as good or better.

As I become more knowledgeable and experienced using the D90, I can then work on building a higher quality lens combination to better suite my photo shooting preferences. As with the Olympus, I plan to use the D90 to cover indoor/outdoor car and auto shows, auto racing, car and model shoots as well as the occasional wedding and other fun stuff. As for the best lens combo for my applications, I am considering the following lens but think I will need at least one more fast moving action such as auto racing:

Nikon 18-200 VR

Sigma 10-20mm
Nikon 16-85 DX VR (or possibly the Nikon 24-70VR if $$ permit)
Nikon 70-300 Nikon VR
Sigma 30mm F/1.4
Nikon 50mm

Thank you all for your support and appreciate any further advise you can offer.

Cheers,

Scott Halliday

Start off with the 18-200 VR lens. It has the 35 mm equivalent of 27-300 mm and covers about 95% of everything you'll want to do. Use that for a while and then decide what it lacks that you really, really need.

I started with that lens on my D90, and haven't found anything else I really, really need. I used it to shoot my son's wedding and it was perfect. Then omn Christmas day, when the whole family was here, I did a little portrait set up and shot the whole family one at a time and in various groups. Later, i went back and looked at the EXIF data for the focal lengths I had used. It was 28 mm (42 equivalent) to about 86 mm (129 mm equivalent). To do that with primes, I'd need a sack full of lenses. (Sigma 30 mm f/1.4, Nikkor 50 f/1.8, and Nikkor 85 f/1.8 would do it, plus a little foot zooming) Fast primes will give a lot better control of depth of field than the much slower 18-200 - I admit that. However, I set up in front of a large blue-gray drape and set the people several feet in front of it. The drape is soft and unobtrusive and close to an 18% gray scale and does not detract from the shots like a patterned background would - minimizing the need to blur it out with a shallow depth of field.

The 18-200 VR close focuses quite well, and with 12.3 MP, the D90 shots can stand quite a bit of cropping and still give sharp prints of pretty good size. Cropping in the PC is equivalent to extending the zoom range, and even at 2:1 crops (600 mm equivalent) I still get sharp 8" x 10" prints. Wonderful camera!
--
Jerry

My thoughts (for DX cameras):

1. For indoor portrait type shots the 30-35 mm range is good. If you are shooting low light or fast kids, then get a fast lens - but you might need flash anyway.
2. Portraits look best between 50-80 mm.

3. For Candid portrait or street shooting, you need a zoom with more reach. Luckily these are usually in better light. 50-150 mm.

My recommendations: Get the Tamron 28/-75 f/2.8. Great optics at a good price. Great for true portraits. OK for candids (or use your 18-105vr). and will be good indoors. You will need to get a flash if you take lots of indoor pics of fast moving subjects because f/2.8 is not fast enough. Alternately you could get the Sigma 30 f/1.4 or the Nikon 35 f/2 for indoors, but you may still want flash. My 50 f/1.8 wide open sometimes still struggles with kids indoors.
--
Catallaxy

I just upgraded to 16-85 VR and 70-300 VR. I also have 18-105 that came with D90 that I now use on my D50. 16-85 is nicer than 18-105, but probably not $300 nicer. If you like to shoot animals or birds at zoos and parks you should definately get 70-300 VR lens. I had 55-200 before and it wasn't enough. Whether you want 16-85 or 18-105 is kind of a personal choice, although I love having those 2mm at wide end, but 70-300 VR is almost a must.