D90 - Newbie Lense Advice

I'm a newbie and have finally got a bit of money together to trade up my Panasonic Lumix FZ30 for a DLSR. After much deliberation I've settled on a D90 so now to try and fathom lenses. From what I've read on here the kit lense (18-105 VR) is pretty decent so that seems a good enough place to start. My main interests, other than that, are portrait (candid rather than studio) and macro ie close up of flowers rather than lice (!), that kind of thing, with portrait being the first priority. From what I've read the 85mm F1.8 would be a good choice. I could push the budget a little further so could possibly also add either a 50mm F1.8 or maybe a 35mm but I don't really know enough to know if this represents a good range of lenses or me being a little too enthusiastic! (probably the latter)

What do you think?

Fiona

understillwater said:

I'm a newbie and have finally got a bit of money together to trade up my Panasonic Lumix FZ30 for a DLSR. After much deliberation I've settled on a D90 so now to try and fathom lenses. From what I've read on here the kit lense (18-105 VR) is pretty decent so that seems a good enough place to start. My main interests, other than that, are portrait (candid rather than studio) and macro ie close up of flowers rather than lice (!), that kind of thing, with portrait being the first priority. From what I've read the 85mm F1.8 would be a good choice. I could push the budget a little further so could possibly also add either a 50mm F1.8 or maybe a 35mm but I don't really know enough to know if this represents a good range of lenses or me being a little too enthusiastic! (probably the latter)

What do you think?

Fiona

Click to expand...

All depends on your budget. For a "complete beginner" I would NOT recommend buying prime lenses at all!!! Take your time, save your money, gain some experience and THEN you can make a much wiser choice than just jumping into things.

For an "all-in-one" superzoom I'd recommend the Sigma 18-250mm HSM OS (HyperSonicMotor - OpticalStabilized) lens, which can teach you a lot of things.

D90 is an excellent (!!!) camera that can deliver fantastic images (absolutely pro quality) if you know what you're doing. DO NOT be intimidated by others carrying super-expensive gear and don't get sucked into buying things you don't need!

Learn, experiment, practice, keep shooting, and after a while you'll see what you need, what to buy and what not!

A little time and patience can save you a lot of headache and wasted money!

The kit lens is a good all-round match for the D90. You could also consider the 18-55mm VR and 55-200mm VR combo.

A good portrait lens for the D90 is the 35-70mm f2.8D, available only as used. Its as sharp as the 35 and 50mm prime lenses, and is a professional portrait lens that was standard issue to press photographers around 10 years ago.

You could also look at the Tamron 90mm macro f2.8, which is a specialist macro AND portrait lens.

Another favourite macro lens is the Nikon 60mm f2.8. You could get this instead of the 50mm. Its sharp wide open and is one of the sharpest Nikon lenses ever made.

If money is an issue, then you could consider instead a used D200 or Fuji S5 instead of the D90. The Fuji is based on the D200 body, so both cameras are much better built than the D90, and would also give you full metering with manual focus lenses. These are usually cheaper than zooms and optically better, and you could have a great time buying several different kinds of specialist lenses: portrait, macro, tele. &c.

S.
--
Wait, watch, listen, then pounce !

The first additional lens I bought (besides the 18-105) for my D90, was the 50 f1.8. It is cheap (about $125) and allows for beautifully sharp portraits at f4 and up, decent low light performance (really at f2 and higher - f1.8 is a bit soft), and great macro (you can focus a few inches away from the lens). Out of focus areas are nice and creamy, and the lens is really sharp, especially at f4 and higher. It is a good place to start without spending much money. If you find you don't need it later, you can sell it and not be out much money at all. I have taken senior portraits and family pictures with it and for the money, it is tough to beat.

BTW, I now own the Nikon 18-105 kit, 50 f1.8, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8VR and the Sigma 70-300 OS.
--
K.B.

EGGE said:

All depends on your budget. For a "complete beginner" I would NOT recommend buying prime lenses at all!!! Take your time, save your money, gain some experience and THEN you can make a much wiser choice than just jumping into things.

Click to expand...

I completely disgaree! As an all in one zoom, the 18-105 should be just fine, and any other superzooms will not be able to discernibly outperform it, nor really teach the original poster anything he can't learn with his Nikkor.

In fact the original poster will learn more about photography using primes (available light, DoF, shutter speeds) than he will with a Sigma super zoom.

On my D80 I still use the 28-105 Nikkor I've owned since I shot film on an N80. Since then I've added 20mm, 35mm, 50mm primes and a dedicated tele zoom 80-200mm.

The 35mm 1.8dx and 85mm 1.8 make a lot of sense and don't cost a lot of money.

trifona said:

I completely disgaree! As an all in one zoom, the 18-105 should be just fine, and any other superzooms will not be able to discernibly outperform it, nor really teach the original poster anything he can't learn with his Nikkor.

Click to expand...

Yes, the Sigma 18-250 HSM OS outperforms both the 18-105 and the 18-200 easily for only $480!

You see "understillwater"? These are the things I wanted to warn you about!

DO NOT GET SUCKED INTO BUYING THINGS YOU DON'T NEED!!!

Use your head, read my first post, learn from it and ignore the "smart eggs"!

When the time comes and you have enough experience, YOU WILL KNOW what to buy and won't need ANYONE'S advice!

Best of luck! ;-)

EGGE said:

DO NOT GET SUCKED INTO BUYING THINGS YOU DON'T NEED!!!

Click to expand...

I never said he needed a bunch of primes. I did say that they are relatively inexpensive and that he would learn more from them than buying another slow zoom. My argument is that he doesn't need another zoom.

Since you want to play smart egg and convince this poster that spending nearly $500 on another zoom will not only outperform his current lens, why don't you also tell us what he will be able to "learn" about photography from using it above and beyond what he can learn by using fast primes?

trifona said:

I never said he needed a bunch of primes.

Click to expand...

You've mentioned 6 or so lenses in your post to start with.

trifona said:

My argument is that he doesn't need another zoom.

Click to expand...

No, he doesn't! In fact the one and only lens he needs as a "beginner" is the one I recommended. If he already has the kit lens, he should get rid of it! It's useless anyways!

trifona said:

Since you want to play smart egg

Click to expand...

Contrary! I simplify things for "understillwater" to save him the frustration of the "smart eggs" like you, and also the unnecessary expenses they would drag him into for no reason at all!

If "understillwater" takes my advice, and I hope he does, that's fine! If not, that's fine too!

"... and that's all I've got to say about that...." (Forrest Gump)

EGGE said:

trifona said:

I never said he needed a bunch of primes.

Click to expand...

You've mentioned 6 or so lenses in your post to start with.

EGGE said:

My argument is that he doesn't need another zoom.

Click to expand...

No, he doesn't! In fact the one and only lens he needs as a "beginner" is the one I recommended. If he already has the kit lens, he should get rid of it! It's useless anyways!

EGGE said:

Since you want to play smart egg

Click to expand...

Contrary! I simplify things for "understillwater" to save him the frustration of the "smart eggs" like you, and also the unnecessary expenses they would drag him into for no reason at all!

If "understillwater" takes my advice, and I hope he does, that's fine! If not, that's fine too!

"... and that's all I've got to say about that...." (Forrest Gump)

Click to expand...

If you can't publicly justify a $500 lens recommendation to someone looking for advice other that to state that his 18-105 is "useless" perhaps you should get out of the advice business. You sound like a clown.

D90 might be up for a replacement real soon, I would expect this Summer. It is pretty old body already (2 years?)

You will find supporters of primes and zooms aplenty and everybody is sorta right.

Since you already have a camera to shoot - why don't you try to find some nikons for tries ? You may have better decision based on what you have held in your hands, tried to shoot with, etc. D90 or alike is all plastic body, if this is OK with you - fine, but you at least ought it to yourself to hold onto D300 or alike body to feel the difference. At least you will know WHY you made that decision.

Nik

Look at the new Sigma 17~70 OS f2.8~4. (N.b., not the older one pre-OS). It has quite a fast aperture and pleasing bokeh. It will do most of what you want to do and be a very nice portrait lens.

For macro you need to define 'macro'. Do you mean bugs @ 1:1 or do you mean close-ups of flowers? You could try a decent close-up attatchment if you don't need 1:1. Otherwise a decicated macro lens would be a better choice and can do double duty of portrait. The Nikon 85 is probably a good start (I've not use it) or a Tamron 90.
A lot depends on your budget.
--
http://www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

I tend to agree with thew poster who syas buy nothing extra for now. Yes some people will say get primes, I have a good selection of primes and zooms and most of the time my 16-85VR sits on my camera.

So I suggest you but the camera and 18-105 and get used to it first. It will be able to take every photo you need and will close focus enouf to take shots of flower heads. Its also fine for a starter lens for portraits.

Once you have experience then buy your next lens, you may want to spend your money on a flash first of course. If you have to buy another lens then consider the 70-300VR as you'll get more use out of that. For a prime then get the 35mm.

--
Bluenose

nkarasev said:

D90 or alike is all plastic body, if this is OK with you - fine, but you at least ought it to yourself to hold onto D300 or alike body to feel the difference. At least you will know WHY you made that decision.

Nik

Click to expand...

D90 doesn't have an all plastic body - it has a "good metal chassis" according to dpreview. That's why the D90 feels significantly heavier and more solid/robust than all-plastic DSLRs.

EGGE said:

trifona said:

I completely disgaree! As an all in one zoom, the 18-105 should be just fine, and any other superzooms will not be able to discernibly outperform it, nor really teach the original poster anything he can't learn with his Nikkor.

Click to expand...

Yes, the Sigma 18-250 HSM OS outperforms both the 18-105 and the 18-200 easily for only $480!

Click to expand...

How can you possibly suggest that the 18-250 superzoom outperforms the 18-105 without referencing an objective review or test results that support your conclusion. Simply based on physics and basic lens design principles, a lens with a shorter zoom range with have superior optical qualities to a lens with a longer zoom range. Of the samples I looked at from the 18-250, all were incredibly soft at 250mm. The 18-105 is currently one of Nikons top consumer zooms along with the 16-85. If you are going to claim that the 18-250 Sigma is a better option than the 18-105, please provide an objective measure of its superior qualities, MTF graphs or the like.

While I would suggest starting out with a zoom even though there are many advantages to primes, a prime lens with certainly teach you more about composition and photography in general than a zoom simply because it is more constraining than a zoom and forces you to think about the picture that you are about to take.
--
Trevor

Hi,

I would go for the 8-105 VR + 85mm prime and if you still have room in your budget i would prefer the 35mm f1.8 over the 50 mm considering the fact you will allready have a portrait lens ( 85mm ).

Also dont forget a flash ( SB400, SB600, SB900 ) as a possibilty.

See here for other opinions :
http://bythom.com/nikon-dx-lens-summary.htm
or
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/dx-dream-team.htm

--
Greetings,
Marc

ps : some interesting tutorial websites :

http://www.ronbigelow.com/articles/articles.htm
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/
http://www.normankoren.com/sitemap.html



my photos (examples, see dpreview galleries):

understillwater said:

understillwater wrote:

I'm a newbie and have finally got a bit of money together to trade up my Panasonic Lumix FZ30 for a DLSR. After much deliberation I've settled on a D90 so now to try and fathom lenses. From what I've read on here the kit lense (18-105 VR) is pretty decent so that seems a good enough place to start. My main interests, other than that, are portrait (candid rather than studio) and macro ie close up of flowers rather than lice (!), that kind of thing, with portrait being the first priority. From what I've read the 85mm F1.8 would be a good choice. I could push the budget a little further so could possibly also add either a 50mm F1.8 or maybe a 35mm but I don't really know enough to know if this represents a good range of lenses or me being a little too enthusiastic! (probably the latter)

Click to expand...

understillwater said:

What do you think?

Click to expand...

Hi Fiona,

Very good and pertinent questions.

A few opinions:

Yes the 18-105 is an very good "kit lens". I'm unaware of any credible lens evaluations suggesting that any third party 18-250 "superzoom" will out perform it within its focal range and such a lens will not add to your stated need of a portrait and/or macro lens.

For your stated needs of macro and portrait work, I'd consider killing two birds with one stone if you could afford it (I did that by getting the Zeiss 100/2, but that is not a frugal example!).

Even though the 105VR is relatively expensive, it is an excellent macro lens and can do nice portrait work as well.

A less expensive forum favorite is the Tamron 90 macro.

(For your stated needs, a third party 18-250 superzoom would not be a wise choice.)

Good Luck!

RB

http://www.pbase.com/rbfresno/profile

Thanks for the reply. I know it makes sense not to dive in and buy a load of gear that I may never use.......however, the money I have set aside will get sucked into more mundane household projects if I don't use it for this and I don't know when I will be able to justify the expenditure again. Plus though I know I lack technical ability I am reasonably sure of what I want to achieve. Don't worry, I have another few weeks of tireless deliberation before I part with any cash! And I will take a look at the lense you have recommended.

Fiona

Thanks Travor for saving my typing. I agreed with you 100%.

Trevor H said:

How can you possibly suggest that the 18-250 superzoom outperforms the 18-105 without referencing an objective review or test results that support your conclusion. Simply based on physics and basic lens design principles, a lens with a shorter zoom range with have superior optical qualities to a lens with a longer zoom range. Of the samples I looked at from the 18-250, all were incredibly soft at 250mm. The 18-105 is currently one of Nikons top consumer zooms along with the 16-85. If you are going to claim that the 18-250 Sigma is a better option than the 18-105, please provide an objective measure of its superior qualities, MTF graphs or the like.

While I would suggest starting out with a zoom even though there are many advantages to primes, a prime lens with certainly teach you more about composition and photography in general than a zoom simply because it is more constraining than a zoom and forces you to think about the picture that you are about to take.
--
Trevor

Click to expand...

--
Nick Wong

~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
http://photos.nickwong.net

davoid said:

nkarasev said:

D90 or alike is all plastic body, if this is OK with you - fine, but you at least ought it to yourself to hold onto D300 or alike body to feel the difference. At least you will know WHY you made that decision.

Nik

Click to expand...

D90 doesn't have an all plastic body - it has a "good metal chassis" according to dpreview. That's why the D90 feels significantly heavier and more solid/robust than all-plastic DSLRs.

Click to expand...

True. So does D5000 and possibly D3000. All bodies have some metal skeleton inside. However there is a big difference between "metal body" and "metal chassis". The first thing that breaks upon fall or hit is body shell, if it is plastic. D300 family is also weather-sealed.

That's not to say the D90 is a bad camera, I was just pointing out to some differences between two close bodies while everybody else discusses lenses.

Nik

Phew, finally read to the end of all of the posts on my thread. I'm new to this forum and thought I would be able to reply to specific posters but I think maybe not?

For clarity, as I mentioned in the original post, on the macro front I am interested in close ups of flowers, that kind of thing, rather than ants or anything smaller. And on the camera front I've spent a fair bit of time looking at and holding various DSLRs both within my budget and slightly out of it. I like the feel of the D90 and yes I do know that it is likely to be replaced in the near future but from what I gather the replacement would be more expensive and most likely out of my budget. And the D90 is a great camera. I'm pretty happy with that choice.

And a minor point but I am a 'she' not a 'he'! But back to the lenses, I've realised from the time spent reading threads on this forum before posting that people's opinions can be pretty polarised so I did expect that but I am grateful for all of them as it has given me a lot of food for thought. Don't worry, I won't be making any hasty decisions. Putting aside whether I would regret buying both the 85mm and either a 50mm or 35mm, does that line up make sense? To be honest, it was the fact that the 50mm is fairly cheap that made me even consider a third lense at this stage...and then I read a few more threads and started considering the 35mm instead. Like I mentioned in an earlier reply, this may all seem overkill for a DSLR beginner but the pot of money I have now to spend will get sucked into something far more mundane if not used for this purpose and this is what I love doing.

Thanks again for taking the time to reply.

Fiona