suggestions for Nikon lenses

I'm looking for some advice. I'm a beginner photographer and recently purchased a Nikon D3100 and am looking for a good all around lense to purchase. I'm leaning towards the Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II. Any suggestion?

kristennicole28 said:

I'm looking for some advice. I'm a beginner photographer and recently purchased a Nikon D3100 and am looking for a good all around lense to purchase. I'm leaning towards the Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II. Any suggestion?

Click to expand...

The 18-200 Nikkor one certainly meets your requirements: a good all-around lens. I have to add, though, that you can get (slightly) better results by getting two lenses that cover that range. Did the D3100 come with a lens? They're usually sold with 18-55's. If you add a 55-200 to that, you'll have the same range with better quality at less cost.

But you do lose the convenience of having one lens that covers everything, and does it quite well.
--
Leonard Migliore

My camera did come with a 18-55mm and that is a great suggestion. I wanted to buy a lense with a metal mount and 55-200 seem to be all plastic. Is that a big concern?

kristennicole28 said:

My camera did come with a 18-55mm and that is a great suggestion. I wanted to buy a lense with a metal mount and 55-200 seem to be all plastic. Is that a big concern?

Click to expand...

It's a big concern but I don't know if it means anything. The plastic-mount lenses are at Nikon's bottom rung in quality. Somehow, Nikon gets them all to be quite sharp but they're not really made well. For a little more money, you get metal lens mounts along with a better grade of plastic in the rest of the lens (that's where I go; I use a 16-85 and a 70-300). If you're willing to lay down heavy bread, you get solid metal everywhere but those lenses cost like $2000 each. I hear they're really good.
--
Leonard Migliore

Great lens.I have that lens on my D7000 and I am also a beginner,it seems to do most things I want, from landscapes to close ups. Feels good on the camera for an all round lens.
Kind regards

kristennicole28 said:

I'm looking for some advice. I'm a beginner photographer and recently purchased a Nikon D3100 and am looking for a good all around lense to purchase. I'm leaning towards the Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II. Any suggestion?

Click to expand...

Why did you buy a single lens reflex digital camera over a superzoom point and shoot? Hopefully, one of the reasons was to make better images. One of the reasons you can make better images is because you can buy better lenses designed to do specific things.

Super ratio zooms like Nikon's 18-200 or Tamron's 18-270 are do anything but do nothing very well type lenses. I believe they are going backwards from the reason you purchased a DSLR. The optical compromises that have to go into their design make them so they just can't produce as well as other designs. They are convenient, but hopefully you are not willing to trade image quality for convenience. If you are, you made the wrong decision in purchasing that superb new camera.

Really good zoom lenses tend not to exceed 3x in ratio. Your 18-55 kit lens fits that. Some of the best zooms are lenses like the 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200. Notice they are 2x and 3x zooms. Some of us are willing to go to 5x, 6x and even 7x, but there quality really starts to fall.

My suggestion would be to wait a little and really put some thought into it. Don't let NAS (Nikon Acquisition Syndrome) get the better of you and your wallet. Make sure you really have mastered what you have. Make sure you have run into limitations where you can't find a work around. Maybe you can't reach out to show that bird. Maybe you can't focus close enough to flowers. Maybe you can't wrap your subject around you and show enough depth. Maybe you want better low light characteristics. Whatever it is, know what you need to overcome it. Then and only then decide on a new lens to do what you want to do.

So, my question would be, where has your current gear let you down and you could not work around that limitation? How has your current kit lens failed you? Have you mastered that D3100 and that 18-55 VR lens? Are you ready to master another focal length?

If so let us know. Just don't ask for a suggestion without being armed with this information. The answers you'll get might be meaningless. If you have tried to take a picture of that bird on the feeder and can't get close enough without scaring it and you've tried better stealth techniques and still can't get there, I'd suggest a telephoto zoom like Nikon's excellent 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 AFS VR. I'd not settle for a cheapie in this case. It's not very expensive and is in fact less than that 18-200 you were thinking about.
--
Cheers, Craig

Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile

I don't think of the plastic mount as a problem.

It's not as robust as a metal ring, but it's not fragile in any way. As a beginner you won't get any disadvantage from it.

The plastic is the same as the stuff the body shell is made of, so don't think of it as ready to break. If you treat your lenses with the reasonable care you should any lens then there will be no issue.

--
StephenG

Thank you that is great advice. I have experienced some frustration using my current 18-55 lens. I was in Alaska with innumerable shot possibilities, however I had the limitation of being on a ferry and felt my lens was inadequate. I would like to have
more zoom without sacraficing quality.

I also would like to know what lens would give

I would second Guidenet's suggestion. If you need more length, get the 70-300 as a second lens.

kristennicole28 said:

Thank you that is great advice. I have experienced some frustration using my current 18-55 lens. I was in Alaska with innumerable shot possibilities, however I had the limitation of being on a ferry and felt my lens was inadequate. I would like to have
more zoom without sacraficing quality.

Click to expand...

In that situation you needed more reach, not more zoom range. So you're looking for something with maximum reach of 200 or 300mm. Nikon makes several of these, and in discussing plastic vs. metal mounts you've identified one difference among the various models. For a beginning photographer, a 55-200 is fine. It will have a plastic mount and fairly slow maximum apertures, but the price will be reasonable and the performance satisfactory.

kristennicole28 said:

I would like to have
more zoom without sacraficing quality.

Click to expand...

I don't think you want more ZOOM. I think you want a longer lens with more telephoto facility. Zoom means to change focal length. It can mean from wide to wide or long to long. "More zoom" doesn't mean much. Some novices moving from point and shoots say "more zoom" when they mean more telephoto.

The 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 AFS VRII is one of the finest examples of a zoom lens that can reach out to 300mm. It has the AFS-II design sonic ring motor along with 2nd generation Vibration Reduction. It sells for only around $550. It has a metal mount and a fairly good build for a consumer grade lens.

Personally, I'd stay away from the cheapo builds like the 55-200 or 55-300. They aren't that much cheaper in the long run and I'd rather you not get stuck in the kit-only type glass realm. Each piece of glass should be well thought out, being used for particular reasons. The 70-300 vr makes a great all purpose wildlife and casual bird lens. It's particularly meant for good light and should last a lifetime.

Here's three shots taken with mine.







--
Cheers, Craig

Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile

Not sure if it helps but Lenshero has a comparison tool.

http://lenshero.com/lenses/nikon-d3100-zoom-wildlife-lens-less-than-1000

It helped me see options outside of Nikon for lenses. It also takes into account cost.

Read lens reviews they may show you that the cheaper lenses aren't that bad.

So far I think you've been getting some very good advice.

Just putting in my 2 cents worth: besides Nikkor lenses, you could also consider third party gear. Tamron makes a really fine 70-300mm. with VC (Tamron's equivalent to Nikon's VR). Same goes for Sigma's 70-300mm. with OS. These give you the reach you're looking for without compromising too much on quality, and they're considerably cheaper than the Nikon 70-300VR.

--
'We are only immortal for a limited time'

I have to put a nuance on what Guidenet said.

If you are using very much the telephoto part focal lengths then it is worthy to buy an expensive lens. If you seldom use it the cheaper alternatives are a better choice (especially the 55-200 mm VR because the price difference between 55-300 mm VR and 70-300 mm VR is too small to be considered).

As you needed a lot of reach 300 mm is much better than 200 mm so Nikkor AF-S 70-300 mm VR is the only viable solution.
Here is an example when 200 mm is OK:



--
Victor
Bucuresti, Romania
http://picasaweb.google.com/victorpetcu69/
http://picasaweb.google.com/teodor.nitica/
http://picasaweb.google.com/vpreallize/
http://picasaweb.google.com/v.petcu.gci/
http://picasaweb.google.com/vpetcu.gci.arhiva/
http://s106.photobucket.com/albums/m268/victor_petcu/

Thank you everybody for all of the advice. I feel so much more confident in what im purchasing which will more than likely be the 70-300. One more question, I've heard that you always need to use a tripod with the 70-300 is that true?

No. You can comfortably hold the 70-300, and the VR helps with shake in most situations. Lower light conditions, and you may want a tripod, or a monopod, depending on the situation.

Take care. There are two 70-300 mm lenses made by Nikon.

The oldest design is a lemon and it has no VR. The newer design has VR so you don't need a tripod because you can hold it steady at least at 1/80 s.
--
Victor
Bucuresti, Romania
http://picasaweb.google.com/victorpetcu69/
http://picasaweb.google.com/teodor.nitica/
http://picasaweb.google.com/vpreallize/
http://picasaweb.google.com/v.petcu.gci/
http://picasaweb.google.com/vpetcu.gci.arhiva/
http://s106.photobucket.com/albums/m268/victor_petcu/

baloo_buc said:

Take care. There are two 70-300 mm lenses made by Nikon.

The oldest design is a lemon and it has no VR. The newer design has VR so you don't need a tripod because you can hold it steady at least at 1/80 s.
--

Click to expand...

Actually, there are four:

• AF Nikkor 70-300mm. f/4-5.6D
• AF Nikkor 70-300mm. f/4-5.6G
• AF Nikkor 70-300mm. f/4-5.6 D-ED
• AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm. f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED VR

Stay away from the first two, they are rubbish. The D-ED is a lot better. It's no longer around new, but you could find a decent second hand copy for a good price. The AF-S VR-model is the current and best version. If you can afford that one, go for it or (as I said in my earlier reply) consider the third party alternatives. If you want the cheap option, get the D-ED.

--
'We are only immortal for a limited time'

kristennicole28 said:

Thank you everybody for all of the advice. I feel so much more confident in what im purchasing which will more than likely be the 70-300. One more question, I've heard that you always need to use a tripod with the 70-300 is that true?

Click to expand...

It is always a good idea to have a decent tripod. Lots of fun situation are better with one. (long exposures, for example at night).

But in normal situations you can easily hand hold the 70-300vr. It has good (effective)stabilization, good image quality. I highly recommend this lens.

--

See my plan (in my profile) for what I shoot with. See my gallery for images I find amusing.

The 70-300VR is a great lens - but...

If you're planning on using polarization filters then you will almost certainly be needing a tri/-monopod. The small aperture at its longest zoom requires good lighting conditions.

If I'm grabbing my Dslr for casual shooting, then I usually pack the following:

16-85mm (A "softish" lens - but extremely versatile in daily use. If you're not going to invest in a wideangle lens it'll serve you fine - and has a very good zoom range).

50mm 1,8 AFD (inexpensive, great for portraits on my D7000, weighs nothing and will keep you happy in even the darkest of conditions)
Said 70-300mm.

And if I'm using it for indoor events - just my wonderful standard primes (50mm on the D700/35mm on the D7000).

But I would not discard the 18-200 by any means. It's a GREAT travel lens!