Next step Lens

Hello all

 

I have a Nikon D40 that came with a 18-55mm lens which obviously has its limitations, what i would really like is the

18-200mm lens but at $900 its out of the question, thats more than my camera cost, almost twice the price and i

cant afford that.

 

What would be the next reasonable lens up for me or would it be better to wait and buy the 18-200mm when i can?

 

Feel like an impatient kid in a toyshop asking this question, is there a cheaper lens that would give me almost the

same results, someone told me the 18-200mm is the only lens you would ever need, i dont know any real

photographers, so i have to embarass myself in public.

 

Thanks for reading.

 

Simon.

Since you're obviously on a budget for photography, you don't have the luxury of buying a $900 lens in hope that you might need it. How long have you been using your current setup? What type(s) of subject matter interest you? Perhaps you might connect with a fellow photographer who might be willing to let you try a lens similar to what you think you need. I can show you a drawer full of lenses I thought I had to own to become a better photographer but are seldom used. Until you are sure you've taken the 18-55mm lens to it's limit, I'd hold off on additional purchases.

Firstly I suggest you totally disregard: ``someone told me the 18-200mm is the only lens you would ever need``

 

Secondly, I suggest you use the kit lens and determine what YOU cannot do with it, that you wanted to do.

 

From that point you can ask more output focussed questions (as an example only): ``I cannot get good shots with the kit lens of my son playing basketball the Gym . . . I think the Focal Length is OK but they are always blurry, so I know I need a faster lens, but heck I cannot afford one of those F2.8 Zooms . . . are there any budget options?``

 

***

 

Meantime IMO you can take great pictures with the Kit Lens, I have an old Canon Kit Lens: it works fine: you can get good results if you work within its parameters, and that too is a learning tool.

 

One example, there are more if you have a peak:

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/7276581

 

***

 

I suggest you use your kit lens, to determine more accurately what gear YOU need to take the photos YOU want: your lens choice should be for YOUR needs based on what YOU find is limiting with what you have: not someone else`s ``one stop solution``.

 

IMO, if you develop more than a cursory inertest in Photography, I suspect the WORST thing you could buy would be a Maxi Zoom, like an 18 to 200 zoom.

 

Be patient, play a lot with what you have: it will be rewarded.

 

WW

The 18-200mm is less than $700, new. You can get it for less used.<p>

My last film SLR was less than $400 and the lens was more than $700, so the ratio is not unusual. The 18-200mm AF-S VR works well with the D40, as does the 24-120mm AF-S VR (less than $400 used).<p>

Good luck, there's no right or wrong answer.

My 2 cents, Don't under estimate a 55-200mm VR. It takes better pictures that most photograher can.

First of all, you can buy a MINT 18-200mm on ebay for $550. Also when you buy the 18-200 you can sell your lens to help pay

for it so it will really cost you like $450. I own one and they are great, especially for beginners, who are need the flexibility of

such a wide range to experiment. Also it has such a close focusing distance, you can sort of use it as a macro as well. If I

were you I would save up and buy one. But don't feel limited by your gear! Remember, you can make a masterpiece with a

disposable.

-- "... a 18-55mm lens which obviously has its limitations"

 

Tell us a bit about the limitations that YOU feel it has. If we know where the lens is limiting YOU, we can suggest a better lens.

 

In addition to the others, I also think a 18-200 is not the only lens you will ever want and need!

Agree with Tommy -- 55-200 offers a lot of value for those with limited budgets.

 

Will

Simon - all of the answers you've received so far are good a valid, albeit sometimes a bit contradictory, but we all have ideas on what we think is best based upon our individual experience. What has been left out of this discussion, is the fact that there's nothing more important to getting a good image than your lens. I don't care of you've the latest and greatest highest megapixel body offering on the market, its just a box to collect light and if you use a sucky lens, you'll get sucky photos. The 18-55 is actually a very good, under-rated lens so you should explore the limits of what you can do with it before you look to something else. Try NOT using the zoom feature and physically moving closer in or further away to see what it will do for you.

 

William correctly pointed ou that you should exhaust the potential of this lens before you move on, and specifically try to figure out what you really need (not 'want') to do the things you can't with this lens. The 18-200 is nice, convenient, and relatively small, but can become a crutch that can stifle creativity. When the time comes that you decide what will be best, take a look at some of the lens reviews here on pnet and scour the net for the best buy in good used (or new) glass for your D40 (which is more versatile than you might think). Do not scrimp on the lens - you won't be sorry in the long run. --Rich

Thank you all for some great advice, most of the time my lens does just what i want it to do, i live in N.C on the coast, so every now and then i like to take pictures of birds on the beach or on my bird table, most of the time i have to resort to stalking up on them to get close enough, and then 95% of the time they fly off.

 

Its just my ears stood up when i heard this quote about the 18-200mm, it would be nice to have an all in one, rather than collecting numerous lenses, my camera goes everywhere with me and i do not like the idea of carrying a large pack around with me everywhere i go. I have far from exhausted the lens i have got, but i was thinking further down the line, I have just moved countries and bought my camera, now i am totally hooked, i am thinking about the future, thatks Ted for the ebay tip, thats a huge reduction from $900.

> so every now and then i like to take pictures of birds on the beach or on my bird table, most of the time i have to resort to stalking up on them to get close enough, and then 95% of the time they fly off. < (SJ)

 

Ah! Specific outputs named . . . so thinking this through, I make these two points:

 

1. You don`t really require the 18 to100mm part of the 18 to 200 lens, do you?

 

2. And would an extra 100mm would be really nice?

 

So, a (better) lens for you consideration, (and about the same budget mark) given the outputs you just specified: AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED-IF VR

 

I am not saying you rush out and buy the 70 to 300: what I am saying is, now that you have identified just one of YOUR uses, I can make what I consider a much better suggestion for you to consider.

 

I think it is very important to identify ``outputs`` and select / build a kit accordingly and (often overlooked) build a kit which fits together.

 

The very first thing I noted was the 18 to 200 gains you very little (if anything) from 18mm to 55mm, maybe a fewer lens changes: but one of the greatest STRENGTHS of the SLR ``system`` is that it is an: INTERCHANGEABLE Single Lens Reflex System.

 

WW

Thank you for you comments William, the lens subject really is a tricky one for me, i play around with different lenses in Best Buys all the time, i will have a go with the 70-300mm you have suggested, that all made very good sence.

 

Thanks

The rule of thumb when buying a new lens is to get one that is twice or half the focal length of your present lens. so you might

be looking for an 80mm to 300mm zoom lens now. Nikon are good lens but so is Sigma/Tokina/Tamron et all and they are

probably half the price of the Nikkor lens. Your present wide angle is quite sufficent.

> The rule of thumb when buying a new lens is to get one that is twice or half the focal length of your present lens. <

 

I had not heard of that rule of thumb.

 

WW