Lens for D90

[eric_arnold]

<p>thanks john, i literally had about 3 seconds to shoot that shot, from the waist, no time to look at the viewfinder, just guessing angle, etc. hit af-on, listened for the beep, and clicked. a 17-55 would have given away the game, i'm afraid.</p>

[carl_becker2]

<p>For landscape I use a tripod and a light zoom of normal range or a wide prime. Size and weight are more important than weight. I use a Tamron 28-75mm with a D700 because of the weight and range when hiking up to 15 miles or Nikkor primes from 20mm to 500mm if close to the car, less than a mile. I have done a little event shooting with the same range but also like a fast normal lens or something just a bit wider. I use three different tripods, a very light small, a short light and a strong large. I would look closely at a 16-85mm and a fast 30-35mm prime.</p>

[crow0806]

<p>You wouldn't buy a Prius to haul logs, and you wouldn't buy a logging truck to get good gas milage. Street and landscape are as different as the above vehicles. You need two lenses and a good medium tripod because you want to do two entirely different kinds of photography. When I was shooting film I used 17-35 and 35-70 lenses for 99% of my landscape photos, and rarely a 70-300. You need wide for landscape. I have never shot street so listen to others for that.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>I'd get an 18-70 (used) and a 35mm f1.8 (new) and then wait and see how that worked for me, and upgrade to f2.8 lenses if I felt the need. You will probably like the 35mm a lot as it's the old "standard" lens for the most part (I shoot with it a LOT and love it), and I'm guessing the 18-70 would be great for lightweight street photography.</p>

<p>Shoot with that 18-70 for a while, and if you decide you have to have either f2.8 or VR, sell it and get the one you will, by then, KNOW you need. Or maybe by then there will be a Nikon offering like the new Canon in that range with VR AND f2.8.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Even just for landscape alone, one will likely need multiple lenses, although you can start with one. Street photography have different lens requirements as it has already been pointed out.</p>

<p>Moreover, for any good landscape photogrpher, a tripod is a must for stability and sharpness. If you don't use a tripod, you are merely wasting the quality from your expensive lens.</p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>Moreover, for any good landscape photogrpher, a tripod is a must for stability and sharpness. If you don't use a tripod, you are merely wasting the quality from your expensive lens.</p>

<p>So true. Lots of photographers come to these forums trying to buy the sharpest lens--then shoot handheld at lowish shutter speeds. Most modern lenses are quite sharp if stopped down to f/8 and used properly from a tripod. </p>

<p>It's hard to generalize about "street" and "landscape" photography--means different things to different people. Many people think "wide" for landscape but lots of good landscape shots are taken with telephotos as well. And your approach for "street" matters too--some are taking grab shots from the hip, relying on autofocus, some talk up their subjects but like compact equipment to keep their subjects at ease. Some use wide angles and hyperfocal focusing. Some people say "street" but what they're thinking could also be called "cityscape", more of a variant of landscape.</p>

<p>A D90 has a great medium size build--my first instinct is not to slap a big heavy lens on it and ruin its handling; I'd go for a 18-70/3.5-4.5 or 16-85/3.5-5.6 VR for starters and then consider other complementary pieces like a 35/1.8. Later maybe add a 85/1.8, 60/2.8 macro or 100/2.8 macro, for short telephoto, 12-24/4 zoom, etc.</p>

[matroskin]

<p>if you have to have zoom, like many people i recommend Nikkor 24-70 f/2.8. but if that's your first (d)slr i strongly recommend a prime. 50mm is my favorite lens that is on my camera most of the time. it'll teach you discipline, composition. here are some samples - <a href="http://mooostudios.com/Mondrian_imperfection/imperfection.htm">http://mooostudios.com/Mondrian_imperfection/imperfection.htm</a><br>

enjoy the camera.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>Wow...</p>

<p>I am constantly amazed when people recommend a 24-70 for DX. Folks, 24mm is not wide enough for DX at the wide end unless YOU KNOW you don't need any true wide-angle, which, come on... is not most of us...</p>

<p>24 - 70 is not a great general purpose zoom for DX, 17-55 is.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>A D90 has a great medium size build--my first instinct is not to slap a big heavy lens on it and ruin its handling; I'd go for a 18-70/3.5-4.5 or 16-85/3.5-5.6 VR for starters and then consider other complementary pieces like a 35/1.8. Later maybe add a 85/1.8, 60/2.8 macro or 100/2.8 macro, for short telephoto, 12-24/4 zoom, etc.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>this is actually a really good point. balance does matter as far as ergonomics, etc. a dXXX or Dx -series camera will balance a big, heavy lens better than a dxx-series camera. and for landscapes and cityscapes, a 16-85 + d90 would definitely be a nice pair. that lens wouldnt be my first choice for street, but then everyone does street a little differently.</p>

<p>as an aside, before i had a d300, i used the nikon 18-70 and tamron 28-75 with a d80. both balance nicely on that camera, which is about the same size as a d90. i still like the small form factor of the d80+the 50/1.8 and may pick up a 35/1.8 for that reason (though i already have a sigma 30/1.4).</p>

<p>for "pure" street shooting, compactness of kit is a huge plus and probably one of the main factors which should be weighed. conversely, landscape also entails several different approaches, from galen rowell-esque minimalism (i.e. can you fit it in a waist pack or small bag) to tripods and long lenses (which mean staying close to your vehicle) to something in-between. and if you're stopping down to f/8 anyway, an 18-55 is just as good as a 17-55. if, on the other hand, you need good performance at large apertures and DoF isolation, a 2.8 or faster is the way to go.</p>

<p>anyhoo, ida has already narrowed down her choices to the 17-55 and 24-70--with possibly the 35/1.8 for when she wants to "go light." can't really fault that as both are impressive optically and should outlast the d90 body itself. and to counterbalance the weight of whichever zoom she picks, she can always add a battery grip, which will add more weight of course, but also make vertical shots easier. if she's serious about landscape, she should also get a good tripod/ballhead combo and a cable release.</p>

<p> </p>

[robert_delaurentis1]

<p>I'm a big fan of the 35-70 f2.8. The image quality is first rate. Images, out of the camera, simply pop. On a D90, its a normal to short tele. If your imagery tended toward wider I'd go after the Nikon 17-55 f2.8 instead. Try renting lenses for while - its a good value and a great learning experience that will save you money in the long run.</p>

[mark_drutz]

<p>The Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 is an excellent lens, but very expensive. Also very good and far less expensive is the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 VC or its less expensive version w/o VC. I would get the Tamron with VC over the Nikon. The difference in IQ is not great, it's much smaller and lighter, and you'll have enough left over for another very good lens or flash.</p>

[heimbrandt]

<p>Please forgive me if this may sound insulting, but you are open to 35mm and 50mm normal lenses on a D90. You do know that the 50mm on your D90 will in effect be a 75mm short telephoto lens rather than a normal lens, right? While lens choice is highly individual, most landscape zooms tend to be wide angle zooms. Same holds true for street photography where the shorter focal lenghts not only help you fit the street scene in the frame but also get a short enough shutter time for quick candids without motion blur.<br>

My point is that you should perhaps also consider the Nikon 10/12-24mm zoom lenses? They would correspond to 14/18-35mm wide angle zooms on 35 mm film. Most likely, you will get a standard 18-55 or 18-105mm zoom as a kit lens with your D90. The problem is the wide end, where even the tank built 17-55 does not get you much wider despite its hefty price tag. The 16-85 is only 2 mm wider but in effect it feels much wider. However, the real wide angle zooms complement the stock zoom focal lenghts in a more price effective way.<br>

Go to a good store and fit the lenses discussed here on your camera and see what actual field of view they offer since number rarely tell it all to others than the true buffs.</p>

[maryanne_morrow]

<p>Apparently (or so I am told from my local photography store) that Sigma just announced a new lens: 17-70mm f/2.8-4.0 OS macro. $599 (canadian). Not a bulky lens to weigh down your camera. Not in stores (at least in Canada) for maybe another month.<br>

Any thoughts on this lens???</p>

[lonnie_paulson3]

<p>If you haven't bought your D90 yet, why not buy your D90 with the kit lens 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6. The camera and lens combination comes in one box and it is a very economical choice. This is what I did.<br>

I like the Nikon D90 a lot it has a lot to offer for a low price for digital.<br>

Visit my website <a href="http://www.lonniepaulson.com">www.lonniepaulson.com</a></p>

 

[jkiffmeyer]

<p>I highly suggest getting the 35mm 1.8 DX and using that for a while. It is a great standard prime for DX and will provide a simple discreet package for SP. It will let you experiment with wide apertures, and will quickly let you know what range you are looking for in mm. If you are constantly wanting to get closer, then go with the Tamron 28-75/2.8. If you are always backing up and trying to get wider, then go with one of the wider 2.8 zooms mentioned. (I have the Tamron 28-75/2.8 and it is great as long as you don't need to go wide) But I think the key is to start with a prime that you will always appreciate having in your kit, such as the 35mm. Primes are excellent for learning, it is inexpensive, a good quality for the price, and you can always sell it later for little loss.</p>

<p>James</p>

[mirceaciuca]

<p>Sigma 30mm f/1.4 better than Nikkor 35mm f/1.8.<br>

A fast lovely lens. I don't like Sigma, but this one is nice to have it. Is a Dx lens.<br>

Nikkor 50mm f/1.8.<br>

I use D80 and Tamron 28-75/2.8 for street. Or 20/2.8, 50/1.4 and 105/2. For street think about 28-100mm. Like Nikkor 28-105mm, 1:2 macro.<br>

But for landscape I use Tokina 12-24/4. You can find a used one or a Tokina 11-16/2.8.<br>

I use this lenses because street I shot with F100, not with digital. Digital is for work and party, film is for my self ;-)<br>

PS: a good zoom is 17-50/2.8. But personal I don't like this lens. Nikkor 17-55/2.8 is a lovely lens, but a little heavy. Nikkor 16-85VR is sharp, but at 85mm you will have f/5.6. Is a little hard to choose.<br>

Tokina 12-24/4 and Nikkor 24-70/2.8 or Tamron 28-75/2.8.<br>

Or<br>

Tokina 11-16/2.8 and Tamron 17-50/2.8 or Nikkor 17-55/2.8.<br>

Personal I don't like zoom, but they are comfortably and easy to use.<br>

Good luck!<br>

Or a nice Nikkor 24/1.4 and a Tokina ....</p>