Lens For A Nikon D3000

[Lily Quartz]

I am trying to figure out which lense would be best for me to buy, I am currently planning on buying a Nikon D3000 which has Nikon F mount (with AF contacts)
I want a cheap, light lens (around 100$) which I will use as my base lens to carry around with me. I would like it to have apertures from around 1f to 6 f and am not too worried about zoom capabilities.
A medium sized focal length would probably be best (around 50mm)

P.S. This will be my first SLR so I am pretty new to the whole lense things and any tips would be appreciated

NOTICE: I meant to say Nikon D3000 Really sorry about the mix up!

[pwnage101]

you may want to instead consider the Nikon D90 body. The D90 supposedly has the same sensor as the D300, but tests done by Ken Rockwell show that it can be better than the D300. Unless you want a heavier, fully metal body with weather sealing, I'd suggest the D90 for half the price. Of course the D300 has other advantages; perhaps you can specify why you made that decision?

As for the lens, I suggest you get the Nikkor 35mm f1.8G because on a DX crop sensor the field of view from a 35mm lens is about the same compared to that of a 50mm lens on an FX (full-frame) sensor. For $70 more you can get the 50mm f1.4D, but for something actually within your budget the 50mm f1.8D is the only option. Those 50mm lenses are perfectly fine if that's just what you're looking for: a telephoto lens. For DX sensors (like the D300 and D90) 35mm lenses are considered "normal".

I don't know if Adorama ships to Canada, but those links are just to give you an idea of the lens

[Colin Southern]

tests [/URL]done by Ken Rockwell ...

Slightly off-topic, but looking at Ken's home page I see that he's using one of the new left-handed model Nikons

[Hans]

Hi Lily,
Not sure what you intend to do with your SLR but...

Though the D300(s) and D90 are great cameras (I have a D90), don't discount the D5000 which is also a competent camera and is even cheaper than the D90 (assuming you are happy to buy only AF-S lenses of which there is a wide choice these days...or focus manually). The camera is ultimately a light proof box that holds the second most important piece of photographic equipment; the lens (the first most important being you ). What you can save on the box you can put into the glass. You can compare D5000 and D90 and see what you think.

When buying a first SLR it is easy to get all wrapped up in the camera specs (most of which you'll most likely never use), buy something too expensive and then spend a pitance (sp?) on lens glass. I bought the D90 and 18-105mm VR, good kit, but the D5000 would have been more than up to the task at about $350AUD less than the D90. A good start might be a D5000 with the 18-200mm VR (effectively a 27-300mm on the smaller sensor) for a few hundred dollars less than the D300 body. A D90 with the same lens would be around the same price as the D300 body (or there abouts).

You could play around with the wide angle and the telephoto ends and see where that takes you in terms of type of photography you'll favour and that will direct future lens purchases. Both of the kit lenses above, are quite good performers when used according to their strengths. I have recently bought a Nikon 50mm f1.8 (which doesn't get sharp until f4). When I use the 18-105mm @ 50mm focal length and stopped down to f8 I can't tell which lens I used. After all, any true artist can work around the weaknesses of the system they use and lenses and cameras worth thousands of dollars are not necessary in producing good images.

Of course it is all up to you, but thought I'd give my 2c anyway

Good luck with your purchase.

[Blazing fire]

Just like to point this out, "NOTICE: I meant to say Nikon D3000 Really sorry about the mix up!"

I want a cheap, light lens (around 100$) which I will use as my base lens to carry around with me. I would like it to have apertures from around 1f to 6 f and am not too worried about zoom capabilities.

I'm afraid it is very hard to obtain f/1 lenses.

About the only decent $100 lens I can think of is the f/1.8 50mm AF-D, which may not auto focus with a D3000.

In my opinion, stick with a compact camera if you're on such a tight budget. It offers good image quality and decent autofocus capabilities on static objects (contrast-based AF handles static subjects well). A compact has very little light fall-off at the edges and good corner sharpness at shorter focal lengths, wide open (usually f/2.8). It's something you get only with expensive lenses costing a lot more than $100. Eg, nikorr 14-24 f/2.8 (1700USD)

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Lily,

Hmmm, another interesting question, but I do think we need more information.

As others have said in response to the original D300 (typo) query, a 50mm lens on a 1.5 crop factor body like the D3000, is going to be quite limiting and Blazingfire is correct; the cheaper AF-D lens will not auto-focus on the D3000.

If your budget is D3000 (body only) + $100, that's not a lot to start with (circa $400-500), but whether the D3000 is an appropriate body depends what your final lens budget will be, what you want to shoot and how soon you will be able to spend more.

Until we know a bit more, it isn't really worth me adding to the divergent advice already here.

It is certainly valid that for that kind of budget, to explore photography, a manual and RAW capable bridge camera may be a better starting place - I did this. The trouble is, to replicate the shooting abilities of the bridge camera in a DSLR and mid-range lenses in a year or two will cost about 10 times the bridge camera - i.e. $4,000 (and 'write-off' the investment in the bridge camera), but if the bug doesn't bite, you don't have to go there.

If you already know you do want to go DSLR, it is a different proposition. Although in time, you will out grow the D3000 body, there will be better ones available by then and in the meantime you will have added some lenses.

Hope that helps,

[Lily Quartz]

I am willing to spend more (up to 700-800$ on body + Lense) It is just that for now I am buying the D3000 to get me by until I learn more about dslr's or see a camera which I really love, so I don't want to spend toooo much on a lense unless I will be able to use it if I bought a new camera.

At the moment I could buy the Body + 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX VR Nikkor Zoom Lens for 400$ OR I could buy The Body + A Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED IF AF-S DX VR [Vibration Reduction] Zoom Nikkor Lens separately for 470$

What do you suggest? I know that the aperture on both those lenses isn't great but I guess that there isn't much option as far as aperture goes for now

[Klickit]

Lily, one thing to consider would be to buy a used camera and lens of someone like Keh.com.
http://www.keh.com/

Keh have a very good reputation for selling second-hand gear. I have bought off them a couple of times and honestly, if I hadn't known the stuff was second-hand, I would not have been able to tell. For the same money that you want to spend, you could get a D3000 plus a better lens. Just a thought.

[Lily Quartz]

Lily, one thing to consider would be to buy a used camera and lens of someone like Keh.com.
http://www.keh.com/

Keh have a very good reputation for selling second-hand gear. I have bought off them a couple of times and honestly, if I hadn't known the stuff was second-hand, I would not have been able to tell. For the same money that you want to spend, you could get a D3000 plus a better lens. Just a thought.

Thank Klickit! I checked it out and you are right it does have a better deal than any of the other sites I have looked at so far (although amazon is incredibly close pricewise because of the free shipping it offers

[Klickit]

Lily, Amazon is close, but you are dealing with a large number of re-salers there. The advantage with Keh is that you have one seller with a known and excellent reputation. Just my 2c worth.

[Dave Humphries]

Lily, Amazon is close, but you are dealing with a large number of re-salers there. The advantage with Keh is that you have one seller with a known and excellent reputation. Just my 2c worth.

In UK, Amazon resellers have never been a problem for me, they offer the same excellent service as the main company, I've never had a problem, but a colleague did once and it was resolved very quickly. It may be different elsewhere and I'm talking about new, not s/h. However, one downside to Amazon resellers is they usually are not included in the free shipping deals - when I ordered two Nikon lenses and matching Hoya UV filters, the latter came from resellers and attracted postage charges, although these were reasonable and visible before I committed to purchase, so I didn't mind.

I don't tend to buy s/h, so have no experience to pass on.

Cheers,

[Lily Quartz]

So, I know where to buy now just not What to buy :P
Should I get the 18-55mm or the 55-200mm? If I bought the more expensive 55-200mm would it work for other Nikon cameras I may buy?

[Sahil]

I am in habit of using 18-55. Lately I offered a local photography club's member, an old man, who was trying to take his own picture with his DSLR, to take his picture. He gave me his camera and as I looked through it I shrugged. It was 55-200mm. I could not get much in the frame and I had to move quite back. It felt very strange as I am used to a wide angle lens, which is, IMHO, a must have..

[Dave Humphries]

So, I know where to buy now just not What to buy :P
Should I get the 18-55mm or the 55-200mm? If I bought the more expensive 55-200mm would it work for other Nikon cameras I may buy?

Any Nikon AF-S lens will Auto-focus and meter on the D40, D40x, D60, D3000 and D5000 PLUS all the other DX Nikon digital cameras, not sure about full frame though.

You have to be quite careful with lenses; most manufacturers (Nikon is not alone), will, over time, make zoom lenses the same focal length range like "55-200" or "70-300" for different models (DX and FX), then forward and backward compatibility can be an issue particularly when buying secondhand if the seller is slapdash with their description on an auction site.

If you can afford it, the 18-200mm AF-S (which I have) is pretty good, but it is DX only, so wouldn't be any help if you later went full frame (FX) with say an D700(?) or D3, D3x.

I could not get much in the frame and I had to move quite back. It felt very strange as I am used to a wide angle lens, which is, IMHO, a must have..

It really depends what you want to shoot AND what you're used to, I borrowed an 18-70 and couldn't get close enough to anything, it was horrid

Cheers,

[sleist]

It really depends what you want to shoot AND what you're used to, I borrowed an 18-70 and couldn't get close enough to anything, it was horrid

Cheers,

That's one reason I like the 18-105mm as the kit lens for the D90. The reach is still short, but it beats being stuck at 55mm if you can't afford more glass for awhile.

[Lily Quartz]

If you can afford it, the 18-200mm AF-S (which I have) is pretty good, but it is DX only, so wouldn't be any help if you later went full frame (FX) with say an D700(?) or D3, D3x.

So would the 18-55 work with FX? Is 18-55 more limiting than 55-200?

It really depends what you want to shoot AND what you're used to, I borrowed an 18-70 and couldn't get close enough to anything, it was horrid

That will not be much of a problem since I am used to my little point and shoot retractable lens so anything will be an upgrade

[Dave Humphries]

So would the 18-55 work with FX? Is 18-55 more limiting than 55-200?

Having researched (on Ken Rockwell's site) No, neither will work FX.

A lens which will, is going to cost a lot more and not be compatible with D3000 - you'd need a D90 (or better).

That will not be much of a problem since I am used to my little point and shoot retractable lens so anything will be an upgrade

Not necessarily, what zoom range is your point and shoot? (or what is your P&S?)
The 18-55mm is only a "3x" zoom, most fairly recent P&S are more than this.

[Lily Quartz]

Not necessarily, what zoom range is your point and shoot? (or what is your P&S?)
The 18-55mm is only a "3x" zoom, most fairly recent P&S are more than this.

I have a Fujifilm Finepix E900, Zoom range 4x optical. It's not recent but it was top of the line when it was bought 5 years ago

[Dave Humphries]

I have a Fujifilm Finepix E900, Zoom range 4x optical. It's not recent but it was top of the line when it was bought 5 years ago

Hi Lily,

The equivalent range of the E900 (in 35mm FX format) is 32-132mm and the equivalent of the 18-55mm is 27-83mm, so the DSLR lens will give you a slightly wider angle starting point than you're used to, but not zoom in as far (as you're used to).

If you're after just one lens for now, and can't afford the 18-200mm, then the kit lens with VR should suit, joking with Sahil (and my specialisation in wildlife) aside, the 55-200mm is not a good choice for an 'only' lens.

Cheers,

[Lily Quartz]

Okay, Thanks Dave, Steve, Sahil and Kit You have been really helpful