Which budget lense is best bang for the buck??

bsundt

Member
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Location
MN, US
--

I am going to be upgrading to the D300 in the next few weeks, which I will use with my 80-200 for sports. Buying the D300 is going to be stretching the budget, but I would like to buy a smaller zoom lense or multi purpose lens. I will use it for family shots or when a big zoom isn't practical. I'm looking at inexpensive as possible ($100-$200). I realize I am not going to get much for the money, but some decent pictures will be better than none.
I will get some nice glass in the future when the $$$$$ is replenished.
Thanks.
 
I'd look at the 18-55VR kit lens. It has a good rep for the kind of photos you are talking about.

Later when the finances allow you can get a faster lens. The 18-70 is also very well liked.
Finally sigma has a 17-70 2.8-4 that people seem to like.
--
Check my Photo Blog

 
I second the 50mm f1.8 Nikkor. While not a zoom, it is a step down in focal length, plus faster while still being small and light. Any zoom is going to cost 3X the price of the Nikkor...unless you want to purchase used.
 
On a limited budget (very limited) if you want to get a lens that will cover alot of the range the 80~200 won't, and have pretty good IQ, and is reasonably fast - the Nikon 18~70.

I wouldn't agree about the 50mm f1.8. It is cheap and it is sharp, but it is not such a useful focal length if you don't have a lens to cover anything else. Not a wide lens on DX and yet not particularly long either e.g. with portraits in mind.
 
--

I kind of want to tag along on thsi thread since I am in a simialr situation. Just bought the D300, the 85 1.8 and have money for 80-200(or Sigma 70-200 haven't 100% decided on that yet).

Anyhow I was wondering of the 18 -... lenses which one had the best IQ or if they are pretty much equal.
 
If you don't need a very wide wide end, the AF 28-105 f/3.5-4.5D is a good lens and is ~$200 used in good condition.
 
Definitely the biggest bang per very low buck :)
--
I am going to be upgrading to the D300 in the next few weeks, which I
will use with my 80-200 for sports. Buying the D300 is going to be
stretching the budget, but I would like to buy a smaller zoom lense
or multi purpose lens. I will use it for family shots or when a big
zoom isn't practical. I'm looking at inexpensive as possible
($100-$200). I realize I am not going to get much for the money, but
some decent pictures will be better than none.
I will get some nice glass in the future when the $$$$$ is replenished.
Thanks.
--
Rumpis :o)

http://foto.pudele.com/ - Low intensity blog about photography, Nikon and some other stuff interesting to me. Just for fun. In Latvian.
 
Check out the ratings - very good lens, well ergraded by both reviewers and users. Mine is my #1 walkaround lens, also shoots most of my events in small venues (birthday parties, e.g.). I have used it for a lot of professional interior work with no image quality issues. You might score a good used one for $200 - but of course be sure you can return it if it's defective/unsharp/whatever.

WmB
 
do a search regarding the 28-105mm, many people have and love them, quasi macro too..check KEH for used ones for around a couple hundred bucks :) Good luck
--

'I am what I am and thats all I am' Popeye 1960. Favorite famous Hollywood celebrity. Don't have time for the rest.....
 
Pssst, but a different body and some good glass, or maybe a flash, or maybe a couple of good books.

Not to sound like a jerk, but it sounds like a $1500 camera is a little beyond your experience level... use what you have and acquire some good glass. If you look through flickr there are photographers (who know what they are doing) that are producing work that will blow you away with D70s and Canon a520s.

The best suggestion I have is that you put that money towards a class at Rocky Mountain School of photography--you could learn a ton (which actually will make a difference), have great time, and leave with some great images to boot. Plus, this way you are still helping our economy, just not through B&AdorMazon.

But as far as cheap good glass, pick up an old manual focus 105 f2.5. I scored an UGLY one for $60 a short bit ago. This is the first photo I took with it (while waiting for a hot dog in Philly) sorry i didn't sharpen it or anything.

 
I'll second the 18-70mm. I scored a used one off Craigslist for less than $200. For that price range I think it's pretty hard to beat.

--

Justaguy93
'Happiness is the absence of the striving for happiness. '
 
I'm not trying to pass my self as a semi-pro. But I do feel I have a fairly good grasp of whats goin on. The reason for the D300 is, I now have the D80. It is fine outside but too much noise at high ISO inside.I shoot mainly sports and that is the only lense I have to this point. The 80-200 not qualify for good glass???????
 
Rockwell compared high ISO results. He says that the D90 is better than the D300 and slightly behind the D3. With the money you save, you could purchase a better lens or a flash. Also, remember that the D300 does not take SD memory cards.
 
I'm not trying to pass my self as a semi-pro. But I do feel I have a
fairly good grasp of whats goin on. The reason for the D300 is, I now
have the D80. It is fine outside but too much noise at high ISO
inside.I shoot mainly sports and that is the only lense I have to
this point. The 80-200 not qualify for good glass???????
--
--

I second the OP about thinking about the D90. I had a D300 then sold it, but later decided I need high ISO. I considered the D90 which is the D300 equal in almost everthing but pro build for cheaper. For the price of the D300 body you can get the D90 and the kit VR lens.

There are nice reviews of the D90 here and also look at Thom Hogan. He has a nice table stacking the current Nikon models and what you get for each additional $.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top