Should I keep my lenses?

[rich_evans]

<p>In a perfect world, I'd pick up a 50 f/1.8 and stick with the rest of what Nikkors you've already got. I'd also ditch the Sigma and try to pick up a decent used D200 (they're out there). I hate to sound like a Nikon snob, but I do agree with Ryan - I've never had stellar experiences with 3rd party glass on my Nikons, but others will dispute that.</p>

<p>However - if you really want to learn photography, pick a focal length - or single lens - and shoot with only that setup for a year. You'll learn so much more about yourself and the importance of composition along with the intricacies and idiosyncrasies of your equipment than you would by messing around with a bunch of the latest and greatest.</p>

<p><br />One of the most unfortunate things that has happened over the past 20 years or so is the explosion of lenses which purport to do everything. It has made most of today's 'photographers' lazy and compromised the quality of the entry level lenses. Used to be you bought a body with a fast 50 f/1.8 or 1.4 and learned to do everything with that combo. C'est la vie.....</p>

<p><br />Anyway - good luck, and let's see some of your stuff. We'll be better able to help out if we know what you're doing.</p>

<p><br />And keep the D40 - its a superb little gem from Nikon.</p>

<p><br />--Rich</p>

[Mark Keefer]

<p>Eli, at 16 or any age, I would not call the bag you have unimpressive, you have some cool stuff to use and I would suggest using them and really learn how to use your camera. My first Digital SLR was the Canon Digital Rebel XT with Kit lens, I picked up a Canon 75-300mm and a tripod and I was able to take some amazing shots. Get to know the gear you have, learn how to use digital darkroom post processing software like Photoshop (full edition or Elements), Paint Shop Pro is another good one. Take lots of photos, after you get really good with these tools you will better understand what you want and where you want to go next.<br>

I upgraded my 350D for the 40D, I kept all my kit lenses and with a few years under my belt using the digital SLR cameras, decided to buy a Canon 100-400mm IS L Glass because I really like wild life photography. I waited, learned more about the camera and took thousands of shots, finally I knew what I wanted next. I can still take good shots with the Kit lens. While high end lenses are nice, they are expensive and they are not magic wands to replace skill. You can achieve excellent results by learning how to make your camera work.<br>

You can take good photos with your really nice collection of lenses. I would wait and work with what you have. You are starting out with equipment I could only have dreamed of at 16. The lenses you have are not junk. Take the time to really get to know them. Now get out there and take some photos. ;)</p>

 

[steve_hovland]

<p>I have both the 18-55 and 55-200 in the VR version and like them very much. I'm pretty much to the point where I will only use VR lenses when hand-holding.<br>

The 50mm f1.8 won't autofocus with the D40 because it uses the screw drive. The new G lens is probably nice but expensive.<br>

If you don't have a tripod, incident light meter like Sekonic L308, and strobe at least at SB600 level I would suggest those as priorities.<br>

If you shoot from a tripod at least some of the time you will see your composition skills improve a lot because you can study what you see in the view finder.<br>

Learn to use the RGB histograms for precise exposure control- possibly more important than having a meter- here's a trick: In playback mode press OK a couple of times to see the RGB histograms. You are watching to see that no channel burns out and that bright objects are not causing underexposure for most of the picture- a tail on the right indicates underexposure from a bright object<strong></strong> <br>

An SB600 has a head that turns and tilts, plus full manual control, so you can get a lot of work out of it.<br /> </p>

[sasvata__shash__chatterjee]

<p>I say this both as a father with a 16-year old with interest in photography, and also as one that got started in the hobby by using my dad's Nikon F many moons ago.</p>

<p>First off, even though you might not get much back from selling the lenses, the overlap you have doesn't make sense to just keep around. I'd either keep 18-55/55-200 or 18-135/70-300 based on your preference, but not both. I do agree with others that even with a reduced kit, and not adding anything more at all, there's plenty of scope for you take a lot of creative pictures of all kinds.</p>

<p>Whatever money you get from reducing overlap, I wouldn't spend the money on the 50mm f1.4G. I'd put that towards a 50mm f1.8D and/or a used 85mm f1.8D (see keh.com) since you are interested in portraits. On the D40 you can manually focus. But better yet, commandeer your dad's D80 when you need to use those lenses, . This is what I used to do and what my son did, first by hoarding my D70, and now my D300 which I bought to have some exclusive usage, to no avail. But the reason I don't complain and even encourage it is that my son has shown a genuine interest in photography, enrolled in a course at school (lucky to have a great photography program at his school) and is showing great promise. And, that is what I would recommend to you, keep up your grades in regular studies and show your parents great interest and improvement in photography. Enter some contests to just enjoy the spirit, show some great work to your dad and I can guarantee he will not mind sharing his D80 with you a bit.</p>

[BelaMolnar]

<p>My dear young friend. 16 years old/young. You has all the lenses some people just dream it years ago. I would say, you have to mach. The only thing you need is, get out and learn photography. Learn to create images, not snapping your fingers on the camera, hoping the camera will do an image for you. You are the one whom going to create an image, not the camera. You can, create a beautiful image, with a most cheapest camera, and one lens only. See Henry Cartier-Bresson. He created beautiful images using a single camera and lens only. To learn photography, you also has to learn ART, how to compose an image, light and shade, color and contrast, detail, and mostly, what do you want to communicate with your images. To understand light/shatter speed/ aperture/ etc. Not like some so called photographers, whom do not know, what is the difference between "aperture and departure". . . . To create a good image, you don't even need a camera, like the Nikon D40. Learn to see the world around you, to notice beauty, or ugliness, and thousand shades between. Please don't be a equipment junky. And not even a techno junky. Study famous painters and photographers images. Visit art galleries, more often, then beer stores, camera stores and web sites. Give a time for yourself, to develop, advance, not for your camera bag. Then, . . . you going to be a great photographer.<br>

Take care, and have a wonderful shooting.</p>

<p>Best regards; Bela L Molnar</p>

[josephbraun]

<p>no way... I wouldn't give up all of that focal length; but i'm not you. if you think getting this new toy is going to get you out that door and shooting again, then go for it. :)</p>

[shuo_zhao]

<p>Whether the 50 f/1.8 is a usable lens on the D40 largely depends on how you shoot and what you shoot. It's almost useless for sports/action, but it's fine for static scenes. Of course one of the reasons to have a fast lens is to be able to freeze action, the lack AF defeats that to a extent.</p>

<p>Eli, the current issue with your system is that you have more than one lens covering the same FLs. The 18-55 and 18-135 are both standard DX zooms, and while the 55-200 and the 70-300 are different (shorter vs. longer and DX vs. FX), they are both consumer grade slow telephoto lenses.</p>

<p>Before you can make a educated decision on what's the best plan to go with, you have to figure out what you really need in practice, and what you'll lose from selling certain items. For example, your original plan gets rid of 3 lenses, the 18-55, the 55-200, and the 70-300. Losing the 18-55 won't cause you any trouble aside from losing a lighter and less distorted alternative to the 18-135. Losing either the 55-200 or the 70-300 would still allow you to have some telephoto coverage; but losing both would make you end up with the 18-135 as the longest lens available.</p>

<p>By definition, selling the 18-55 and either the 55-200 or 70-300 would only be minimally problematic. I think it's feasible to reinvest the funding obtained from that on something more useful. But you have to decide on what's more useful. For example, the 50 f/1.4 G AF-S would be an excellent low light portrait, sports, candid, event, and __________ lens; it would also be sharp, as most traditonal normal lenses are when stopped down to f/4 to f/11. (it's probably better than older 50s wide open too) Whether or not that's useful is up to you.</p>

<p>There are other lens choices also, especially around the 50 f/1.4 G's price range. For example, the 70-300 VR nikkor would be a much better quality telephoto zoom (better than your Sigma) with ED glass elements, AF-S SWM with full time MF and distance window, and VR; the 60 f/2.8 micro nikkor would be an excellent choice if you're into macro stuff: it is a nano-coated wonder that's ridiculously sharp and has good bokeh. If you want a better standard zoom, several excellent choices also fall within this range. The 18-105 VR would be more convenient to use than the 18-135 due to its VR system; the 18-70 DX would provide better built quality; the 16-85 VR would be another step up in terms of quality from the 18-135 and 16-85 VR. If you want a fast zoom, perhaps as good alternatives to a combination of a fast prime and a slow zoom; the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, Sigma 18-50 f/2.8, Sigma 24-60 f/2.8, and Sigma 18-70 f/2.8 would also be some of the best attractive choices. So we need to know what you want your lens to do, specifically.</p>

<p>As far as the selling process goes, I would try to avoid trading it in at the camera stores, even if the store is reputable, because they would give you a bad price. For example, I sold my 18-55 DX lens at B&H for only $40. I know for this lens in like new conditon, it's not unrealistic to priced it at $70/80 bucks. (I sold it cheaply because I know this is the lens most people got their lower end cameras with, and so they would not need to buy it again seperately) I would suggest that you try Photo.net classified or craig*list (but try to avoid scams, especially bank check scams, money order scams, and funny made up stories about someone who want you to ship your lens to Nigeria).</p>

<p>I understand that lenses is a very important if not the most important part of your photo kit. As of now, I routinely use two pro-grade lenses: the 24-70 f/2.8 and 105 f/2.8 micro VR on my D40. These two combos have led to some of my best images; and is capable of significantly outperforming my D300 with a consumer grade lens. I guess my experience explains why lenses are important.</p>

[hal_edmonds]

<p>Eli, listen up!<br>

When I was 16 I shot with a Box Brownie. You're very lucky to own a D40. What you have as far as lens is concerned, keep them. Master what they are capable of doing for you. 18 to 200 is nothing to sneer about. They're great lenses!</p>

 

[dwmosman]

<p>Yet another opinion</p>

<p>Consider purchasing a used manual focus lens. You can probably get used Nikon AIS prime lenses for $30-$60. I purchased a 50mm f1.8 and a Series E 28mm f2.8 at the local camera store that I use with my D80. </p>

<p>Fast primes are a little different world from slower zooms. You may love it or hate it but this would be a cheap way to find out. Plus maybe you could make the purchase without having to sell any of your existing lenses?</p>

[eli_fox]

<p>I have not a clue where to start.</p>

<p>You guys have settled it for me in one respect--I'll probably sell my kit lenses and keep my 18-135/70-300. For people who came later and didn't have a chance to interact with me, I was never going to sell all my lenses for a fixed focal length. While that would be pretty interesting to do and would free up a lot of cash, it just doesn't make sense.</p>

<p>I would go for the 50mm f/1.8 or the f/1.4D if there is an appreciable difference; what do you think? One twist that I have to throw in is that my (22 year old) brother also bought a D40 this year, and has both kit lenses. In spite of this my dad still won't let me sell mine!</p>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>Only you can determine what uses/needs you have. In terms of practicality, the kit 18-55mm may serve as a compact model for snapshots using the built in flash without intereference, if that is a need. I would say keep the Sigma 70-300mm at this point. At about 180-190mm, that lens will still provide you with say f/4.5 for sports/action shooting, and thus higher shutter speed than a f/5.6 or f/6.3 lens at that focal length, such as your 55-200mm. I would sell that and keep the Sigma. </p>

<p>If you can, I'd say sell the D40 and get a new D80. There are some exceptional deals around right now. It is a much more advanced camera, and can function with a much wider selection of lenses. Not a bad idea to have a good, fast prime lens. But primes and zooms do not replace one another, as they are different. When you will need to zoom, you'll need a zoom lens. When you need a compact, faster lens (more aperture, like f/1.8) with high image quality in a certain focal range, a good prime cannot be replaced by a zoom lens. </p>

[eli_fox]

<p>Well, I made this with my little D40 and kit lens today, among several other keepers. Makes me re-evaluate my choices.</p>

<p><img src="http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/9828/csc0316xy8.jpg" alt="" /></p>

[DavidRabinowitz]

<p>i'm not sure what you would get for the lenses you want to sell...i'd look up prices on ebay as the auctions close to get some info...i'm also not familiar with the kit lenses and would ask what you hope to get out of a different lens...is the quality of a kit lens that much inferior to what you want...i'd keep shooting and refining your skills, save up some money and buy a better lens when it meets your needs...post a few pics and lets others critique your work, that is often worth more then the money you might spend on lenses, at least when you're beginning...</p>

[w_t1]

<p>Take what Ronald Moravec wrote and print it out and read it and give it to dad. I used a 50mm lens only for several years when I started photography in my early 20's. I couldn't afford more until I got out of college. I took some pretty fine pics with that one lens, the best on top of an old tripod. I had a similar situation when I was your age, when I was 15 I told my parents I wanted a Harley Davidson mc...at that time (about 1975+/-) they made some smaller 125 cc bikes or so. My parents said, "OK, you get a job, and you can spend half of what you want on the mc". Well when I did get that job, which I kept until I graduated from HS, I forgot all about that motorcycle. That's probably the best thing they did for me as far as economics goes. After a year I had $2700 or so saved up from part time work in the produce section, no way I was going to part with half of it for a motorcycle. I have a plethora of lenses now, but I frequently shoot with one, fixed lens. good luck to you and Dad.</p>

[robertbody]

<p>Nice picture, Eli, post it bigger next time, like 700 pixels wide, and if you ever get a cord for your cable, and take the flash off away from the camera, below it in this case (or to the side) you can get better light in your dog's eyes...</p>

[johnw63]

<p>Eli,<br>

What ,specifically, do you want the fast 50mm for ? That might help determine if it will do the job. For instance, if you want to take shots that really send the background out of focus, the small f-stop will help with that, but changing the distance to the subject will change that too, as well as the distance from the subject to the back ground. With the D40, you CAN use normal AF lenses, which are much cheaper, but you need you use your eyes to focus, not the camera. If you don't wear glasses, you can probably do that. At 16, you most likely can. What you might be able to do is take your camera into a camera shop and try the 50mm f1.8 AF-D lens, and just shoot stuff in the store and check out the results. At about $100, it might be what you need. You could sell the 18-55mm, to pay for it, and not lose any range, which your dad is against. You already have the 18-135mm, and you have "access" to the 18-55 from your older brother ! :)</p>

 

[glenjo]

<p>Since you have a body which can only focus AF-S lenses, have you considered buying used AI/AIS lenses? I think you can use these in M mode without metering. Or have you considered renting a lens from a pro shop to see if you like it?<br>

You can get a used 50mm f/1.8 from KEH for less than $100.</p>

[ianhoke]

<p>I just wanted to echo what a few folks here have already posted - get a 50mm fast lens and leave it on for a long time. Learn to use your feet to compose. Play with depth of field and composition. Your learning curve will be so much faster than ours, since we had to develop the film, learn to make prints, and do cool, but slow, time consuming things. Try to avoid getting sucked into the gear wars and spend your time shooting around. When you get a chance, I highly recommend the darkroom experience!<br>

Again, I'm an echo, but it bears repeating. Have a blast!</p>

[charles_reid]

<p>You've probably gotten way better suggestions than this.<br>

I shoot mostly nature stuff. Love it. For that your carry lens is usually the longest combo you have. If you like nature stuff you MUST have a long lens. But - ive shot a nikon sigma 300 zoom (via adapter) and they frankly suck huge. In fact my new 5mp phone shoots about as well. But.. those lenses resell for about what they're really worth.. pocket change. If your carry lens shoots as good as the kits sell them. If you can sell the 300 and combine to get yourself maybe a fast short lens or an actually decent long lens in the 200 to 300+ range DO IT! But i have to say going from 4.5 to even 1.4 isnt really going to help in real dark indoor settings. Still have to use flash. So if thats the goal why not either get a really good flash or jsut a Nice long lens.</p>

<p>Id suggest you get yourself one Excellent LONG zoom or if you never shoot long the Short prime. On reflectors et al. Theres NO REASON to spend ridiculous amounts on any of this stuff. If its pocket change to you (as it was to me for a while) go for it. but theres Nothing other than the electronics you cant do yourself. Lots of links in the forums, on makezine et al. Beauty dishes, reflectors, beauty dishes, whatever you need. For literally nothing. A piece of notebook paper makes a decent small reflector... a tupperware bowl can be turned into a beauty dish. There are good HEAVY tripods CHEAP out there. You may not be able to show off the namebrand but namebrands dont hold cameras still. Best monopod i ever held was a $20 walmart one.<br>

Then the other stuff like remote slave flashes, cable releases (MUST HAVE) but htose are buyable for practically nothin.</p>

<p>Whatever you do you're gonna be JAZZED when you first do it.. regret the HECK out of it at the same time.. and carry on that cycle for a year or so heh. You're young anyway you're Supposed to make mistakes. But ill guarantee one thing. YOu will never ever regret a quality long lens.</p>

[blair_d1]

<p>Hi Eli,<br>

I am also newer to photography. Have been reading non-stop for the last 3-4 months.<br>

I have 4 kids (lots of subjects) and I'm an outdoorsman. I ended up getting the D90 with the 18-105 kit lens. Didn't like that lens, so soon it was returned towards a 18-55 vr and a 55-200 vr. The 18-55 had problems after around 1 month, so the store I bought it from luckily gave me a credit. To make a long story short, I ended up getting the 50mm 1.4 af-s, because the store didn't have any more 18-55's or 50mm 1.8 in stock. I love my 50mm, and I won't be replacing the 18-55. I would rather save for something else. If the 50mm 1.8 was in stock I would have just gone with that for the price.<br>

I say sell the sigma, buy the 50mm 1.8. If you can convince your dad to let go of your 18-55 and the 55-200 towards something else, especially if your brother has those lenses already. If your brother lives at your house still, what is the point of having matching lenses?....share. My wife wants to get a d40, and her lenses will compliment mine, not copy them.<br>

I would rather have one sharp 50mm, than softer, slower kits lenses. If money wasn't an option as far as my photography budget, I would have several fixed lenses and one good quality zoom. I would rather move my feet, and not sacrifice image quality.<br>

Just a thought.<br>

Good luck.</p>

 

[aldrich]

<p>"If your brother lives at your house still, what is the point of having matching lenses?....share."</p>

<p>If the brother moves out (a distinct possibility in the next year or two if he's 22), so do the lenses. This is likely a reason why dad won't Eli sell his.</p>

<p>Sharing is easier said than done among many siblings. Married couples too. My wife and I share the Nikon 70-300 VR, and if Eli and his brother are anything like we are, it's a constant battle over who has it and when. It's all worth it after seeing the Sigma's quality though!</p>

<p>Also, Eli, I'd like to make a correction. In an earlier post, I said that I picked up a 50/1.8 D at a garage sale for $20. I was mistaken. My 50/1.8 is an AI circa 1985, not D. Apologies. It's still an excellent lens if you don't mind manually focusing and metering (it's easier than you think, I swear).</p>

<p>--Ryan</p>

[blair_d1]

<p>Ryan,<br>

I am quite aware that his brother will move away one day with his lenses. Your right, sharing is also not always ideal. When you don't have money for everything you want, sharing is sometimes the answer. If Eli was to sell the doubles, in which he says he is not using much, everyone would have more of a variety. Eli, I assume talks to his sibling and might have an idea as to when he will be leaving the nest, giving Eli time to get a part-time job or whatever to replace those dearly missed kit lenses....or in that time of sharing he finds he would rather something else. I just have more of a mentality that if you are not using something, sell it and put the money towards something you would, even if it's just a $100 50mm 1.8. He wants opinions. Mine is sell the sigma and kits. Buy a 50mm for cheap. He can still borrow his dad's 18-135mm, might have some access to his brother's kit lenses and have money left over towards something else. Rather than having all these consumer grade lenses, where the ranges overlap. I wouldn't go for a hike and pack the 18-55, the 55-200, the sigma, and the 18-135. I would rather just the 50mm and the 18-135, and he isn't even borrowing his brother's lenses on that hike. Everything isn't always "lesson learned." Keep bugging your Dad, sell the kits, get what YOU want, share with your brother in the meantime and prove your Dad wrong, that you are old enough and interested in photography enough to know what you want through your research and experimentaion. You think there are lenses out there if you sell your lenses that would work better for you. How can anyone disagree. Your pulling the trigger.</p>

<p> </p>

[eli_fox]

<p>Thank you all for the hugely informative responses.</p>

<p>Blair, that was exactly what I needed to hear... I think I'm going to buy the 50 1.8D this week. I'm going to NYC with my parents and sister this weekend so it will be perfect for testing it out. I won't need to sell my kit lenses because I do have enough extra cash to just buy it. I may sell my kit lenses in the future however. I probably won't end up selling the Sigma though, it just isn't worth it. A tele is always nice to have anyway.</p>

[eli_fox]

<p>Oh and Robert... </p>

<p>That was the first thing I thought when I saw that picture (no expression in the eyes). I made that one my background on my computer but wasn't satisfied so I switched it to this one instead. I don't think her eyes are much more expressive but it's still a nicer shot:</p>

<p><img src="http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/7996/csc0315iu1.jpg" alt="" /></p>

[lookitsanthony87]

<p>the 50mm f1.8is a great lens that pros and amateurs alike use. its ballparks atabout $135 depending on where you purchase it which makes it a lense you may even be able to purchase just by saving money instead of selling your current collection. at that price its a fabulous route. the 1.4g is a significant price different for a (.4) difference in aperture and very very slight increase in picture quality. i personally have owned both and would say that the 1.4 isnt worth the extra money. hope this helps!</p>