Nikon D-80 Wide Angle?

I shoot a lot of press events and while this camera's 10+ years old, I love it. I'm familiar with it and for my digital-only needs, it takes great shots. I'm looking to add a wide angle lens that is going to be usable in somewhat low-light situations. (I have a 70-300 I've had luck with for when I'm not in the front row but I'd like a wider shot of a group of celebs, for exampe.) I'd like to keep it under $600 but that's flexible. I took it to a camera shop and he was upselling me more on a new camera entirely, but I'd like to not do that right now, and a few that were recommended to me prior aren't available. Anyone have a good recommendation for this camera? Thanks!

Get one ot these used for under $100

 

SIGMA AF 24MM F/2.8 SUPER WIDE II

 

I've got one (replaced it after I dropped my other one 10 years ago).

 

it is as sharp as any of my many other lenses, even the DX 35 G and 50mm Nikkors

 

------------

a little slower (and it zooms !) but it never leaves one of my camera bodies: Tokina 12-28mm f/4

under $300 used if you can find it

Edited January 29, 2018 by steve_g|2

The D80 is indeed a great body, but it is at least 3 generations old. I suggest you also look into a newer body. Benefit would be much greater low light/high ISO performance. My progression was from the D70-80-90-7000-7100. With each change a noticed an increase in low light resolution quality. The 7100 is outstanding in this regard (and the 7200-7300 are better still), and considerably more capable than the D80.

If you'd like to keep the versatility of a zoom, the Nikon 16-85 mm VR lens can be had for less than $400 on the used market - places like Adorama, B&H, KEH, etc. It's a very good lens, and the extra 2 mm at the wide end are quite useful - most zooms like this are 18-?? mm, and the difference between 16 and 18 mm on a DX body is significant. If you get one, plan on leaving the lens hood OFF the camera when you shoot at wider angles using the flash. At 16 mm, the flash will cast a shadow of the lens hood into the field of view.

Give us a clue as to how wide you want to go.

 

For example, a relatively cheap 35mm f/1.8 'standard' lens on DX would double the angle you're getting from a 70-300mm zoom, as well as gain you 2 stops more light.

 

If you want slightly wider, but 1 stop slower, you could do worse than look at Tamron's SP f/2.8 17-50mm zoom.

 

In fact you could get both the above lenses within your budget.

 

I have to agree that upgrading your camera body would be a good move. DSLR low light ability has advanced by leaps and bounds since the D80 was current.

Edited January 29, 2018 by rodeo_joe|1

to be usable in somewhat low-light situations... a wider shot of a group of celebs, for example.

 

While the D80 is a few generations old, it can still hold its own up to ISO 800 and produce somewhat usable images up to ISO 1600. However, later versions are better low light performers, so I would agree with the others that upgrading the D80 to a later version is probably a good idea.

 

If you do decide to stay with the D80 and keep it at ISO 800, I personally think that you will need VR and f2.8 or faster. Also, I think you would want a focal length that starts at 16mm to 18mm. So I would recommend a 16/17/18mm - XXX zoom that has VR and a constant f2.8 aperture along the zoom range. Then factor in your budget.

 

There are quite a few lenses that meet that criteria. Here's an example (A DEMO unit from Adorama): Sigma 17-50mm

Edited January 29, 2018 by photo_galleries

I have an IR converted D80 that I use a decent amount.

 

Since it's my main "field" DX camera(I otherwise use a D800 and film), I go cheap and light with my lens choices on it. My preferred wide angle for it is the Nikon 12-24 f/4. It's not AS wide as the now popular 10-24, nor is it optically as good, but it's perfectly adequate for a D80. I think mine was $300 or so.

I had a D80, that I got with the 18-55VR. The lens was extremely plastic and had a real cheap feel to it. However, it did produce good results on the D80. It costs about filter money used. On the more modern higher resolution bodies, it may not hold up that well, but it is perfectly fine on the D80.

 

I also bought the Nikon AF-S 10-24 and loved it. I loved it on the D7000 too. The lack of VR made me sceptical before I got it, but not something I ever thought of when actually using the lens. I can highly recommend it for DX. Should you later decide to upgrade the camera, you then have a wide-angle zoom that will hold up.

 

While I do not think you will find the 35 mm wide enough, the 35/1.8 DX is a very strong performer for the money.

 

If 18 mm is wide enough, the 18-105 VR is as good as the more expensive options on the D80. It held up fine too on the D7000. If 16 mm is what you want, the 16-85 VR is worth looking at.

The lack of VR made me sceptical before I got it, but not something I ever thought of when actually using the lens. I can highly recommend it for DX.

 

I have to admit that when I bought the "big daddy" 14-24 2.8(FX), I felt a bit short changed at not getting VR for what it cost(~$2K retail, I paid $1250 used). I honestly don't miss it on a wide angle.

I assume that you already have lens down to 18mm. So the 10-24 seems to be the right one to get although quite expensive.

You gotta give us more info, if you want a decent recommendation, or we are guessing.

• What lenses you have now, beside the 70-300.
  
• How far are you away from the subject
  
• How wide a coverage do you want.
  

Thanks for all the responses! I've decided to go for an entirely new camera body and lenses. I shot at a press junket today and got some great shots from third row but I know I can do better if I invest the money. Onwards to the camera shop!