Help On Lens Selections

Folks,

I've recently bought a used F90 (Euro N90), looking to get back into

photography. Not surprisingly, the technology has changed so much in

the last 10 years and I am completely at a loss in terms of what lens

to purchase.

I am an advanced amateur, and am concerned about lens clarity, lens

build and obviously glass quality. I cannot afford f/2.8 lenses at

this time (I'll step up later), but could use some suggestions on

what to buy. I'd prefer 2-3 lenses in my bag, covering 24/28mm

through 300mm.

Your comments are welcome and critical.

Thanks.

Nikon F1.8 AFD 50mm lens is fast, great quality, and very reasonably priced. I don't think many will disagree that this is a good place to start.

I like the 24-85mm AFS zoom. I've had good results, and the fast focusing is a plus. If I'm taking three lenses with me, I'm typically taking that one, my 75-300mm AF ED Nikon and my 18-35mm AF ED Nikon. The later two are inexpensive ways to get wide and telephoto with flexibility and less money. However, I admit that I get better quality with my 135mm, 180mm, 200mm, and 300mm Nikons, all manual focus primes. The manual focus primes seem to have the best build quality out of any of my Nikon lenses. The 75-300mm AF ED is good enough for me for travel applications when I don't have a lot of room or time to mess with the heavier primes. I'd rather get the shot with the 75-300mm than miss it because I didn't have time to change from the 300mm down to the 135mm. I should warn that I think some people are disapointed with the 75-300mm AF ED.

My impression is that if you want good build quality from Nikon's zooms, you have to get the pro stuff (fixed F2.8). The primes will tend to be of better build quality. Most of my manual prime lenses seem to have really good build quality, are heavy, and are of the best optical quality. As for the consumer zooms, sure probably not as good of build quality, but I haven't broken one yet. They do fine for me.

Greg,

First thing, do you use or plan to use either Manual or Aperture Priority mode? If so, forget any of the G lenses. They lack an aperture ring and are only useable in the various Program modes and Shutter Priority.

A two lens combo that would get you from 24mm to 300mm would include the 24-85mm f/2.8~4 IF AF-D and the 70-300mm f/4~5.6 AF-D ED. Both are Nikkor lenses. I have the 70-300mm and had the 24-85mm until I traded it for the 35-70mm f/2.8 AF-D. I made the trade because of the constant, wide aperture.

Another combination would be three lenses, one prime and two zooms. The 24mm f/2.8 AF-D, 35-70mm f/2.8 AF-D, and the 70-300mm f/4~5.6 AF-D ED. This combination has the advantage of a fast, constant aperture, zoom that has a good general shooting focal range.

I'd add a 50mm prime to either combo.

I hope this helps.

Vernon

Thanks for the answers so far. To further clarify my situation, I do prefer manual focus at close ranges and auto beyond 150mm, particulalry when shooting sports. With this in mind, do you suggestions hold fast?

Also, I've read that the 70-300AF ED lens is no where the quality of the older 75-300mm. What are your opinions?

Thanks for the answers so far. To further clarify my situation, I do prefer manual focus at close ranges and auto beyond 150mm, particulalry when shooting sports. With this in mind, do you suggestions hold fast?

Also, I've read that the 70-300AF ED lens is no where the quality of the older 75-300mm. What are your opinions?

Greg,

The 75-300mm does have a heavier build, it has more metal in its construction. I had a chance to try one of the 75-300mm lenses and was tempted to trade my 70-300mm for it. The fact that the 70-300mm focuses faster and that it is lighter made me decide to keep my 70-300mm. I have not had a chance to compare image quality between the two versions, but I have read that the 70-300mm AF-D ED is slightly sharper at the long end.

I think you will be happy with the 70-300mm AF-D ED.

Since you prefer manual focus up close, the 35-70mm AF-D makes more sense than the 24-85mm AF-D. The 24-85mm AF-D is a varifocal design, focus changes as you change the focal length. With the 35-70mm AF-D, focus does not change as you zoom. This comes in rather handy, you can focus at 70mm and then zoom to 35mm and not have to re-focus.

The 35-70mm is a two touch lens, one ring to focus and another to zoom. But, it IS a push pull zoom.

Both of these lenses have the same filter size, 62mm.

If you have an interest in portraiture, you may want to consider the 102mm f/2.5 AIS. You would lose matrix metering and the various Program modes, but you would have one of the best portrait lenses in the Nikkor line.

By the way, I also replied to your e-mail. Let me know if you get it. I've been having trouble with my ISP.

Vernon

A long time ago I heard some photoG's used the theory of doubling their focal lenths to avoid carrying 6 or mroe lenses and still having the variety they needed. Back then it was Nikon SP's so the formula was 25/50/105 primes, but today we can get close.

After trying a 35mm lens for over a year I decided that it just wasn't what I was looking for, mainly dance perfromances and intimate b/w work. So I went back to the 50 (after selling every 50 I had had previously) and I'm loving it. Listen to people when they say 50mm is the most important lens in photography. 50mm is a great portait lens when you get close and wide open, its also good for groups of people or concentrating on one subject in a crowd. If you want to get more environment in then step back, rather than 35mm where I often felt that you took in more than was important for the image and it is usually harder to step forward than it is to step back. 50mm is just the right length for isolating one couple on a dance floor (assuming you're free to roam around them) without looking like you are going to topple over on them.

24 is WIDE, very wide compared to 50mm, and I feel that it can still make a significant difference, sometimes more than 35. With careful positioning you can make 24 look like 35mm, but only more so. When I'm in a close group or wading through the crowd 24 can be used to emphasise one person over the rest of the crowd. Just make suer you don't put their faces in the corner of the image (unless you don't like them).

105 is for when you can't get close or you want some real portrait stuff. My 105/1.8 comes out when I'm in a Jazz club or front row of a Royal Crown Reveue concert.

I also have a 180/2.8 but that hardly ever sees use.

I hope this helps. If I can offer one piece of advice, don't get a zoom, you'll probably find that you only end up using them at the extreme ends of their range, and in which case you are probably not getting all the benefits and suffereing to carry a heavy zoom over a compact prime.

How did I come to this decision ... we'll aftering on going massive equiptment binge and purge sessions I studies the photographs and photographers that I most admired and tried to apply their own formulas to my photography. As a fan of early Eugene Smith I found 50mm to be perfect, but if your a Gary Winogrand fan then 35 is a must and I heard he went wider 28 in his later carrier.

btw. Each of these primes cost less that $200USD in the 2nd hand market.

Cheers

Dave