What kind of Lens would be best for my Nikon D90...

[ramona_hanser]

<p>Hi everyone, I am very new to Photography.<br>

I have a Nikon D90 with 3 different lenses and would love to finally find the one lens, which will capture my photos as I see them thrue the finder.<br>

I am looking for a lens, which will shoot fast enough to capture my busy girls, makes great shoots in the dark, and great close ups.<br>

I was reading up on it, probably something like a low f./ lens and something around a 50mm?<br>

Any input is VERY much appreciated. <br /><br />We are going to Asia comming January and really like to get this specific lens for hopefully some awesome shoots.</p>

<p>Thank you very much</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>Which lenses are you using now, Ramona?</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Exactly which three lenses do you currently have? Please provide some specifics because apparently you are not happy enough with them; it would make little sense if people recommend a lens you already own.</p>

<p>Additionally, exactly why you are not happy with those lenses and therefore need more?</p>

[elliot1]

<p>There is no one lens that will do all that without some kind of compromise. That is the great thing about bodies that have interchangeable lenses - you can choose to use a top quality lens for your exact purpose at one time, and then as the shooting conditions change, select another top quality lens for that purpose and so on.</p>

<p>Nikon's 50mm f1.8 lens is a wonderful lens, highly affordable at around $125 and delivers excellent IQ. </p>

[andylynn]

<p>Personally I love the 35mm f/1.8 on the D90, but that's me. When you shoot, I'm assuming you've got zoom lenses that you're using now, what do you set your zoom at most often?</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>i'd get the 35/1.8. the 50 may be too long for indoor shots.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>Yes, what lenses do you have?</p>

<p>I can shoot with my 35mm f1.8 all day and love it, switch to my 50mm f1.8 when I want to get a tad closer, and when I want to go super-wide, switch to my 11-16 Tokina. The three together are under a grand US. When I have to travel light, my 18-200 is nice, but I like the photos I take with those other lenses better (but only if I can carry a big heavy bag. Went to the zoo yesterday, took just the 18-200 and a 50mm f1.8 in my pocket).</p>

<p>If you don't want to switch lenses a lot and can handle some higher-ISO auto-ISO behavior, I think the 18-105 could be a stay-on-camera lens. It handles well and balances well with that camera.</p>

<p>If you want to take a lot of no-flash indoor stuff, you can either go with an 18-105/35 combo or a 17-55 f2.8 for a lot more money. Only you know your budget.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>Also consider the 16-85 VR. Lightweight, great travel lens.</p>

[vince-p]

<p>I was going to say the 16-85 VR too, plus the 50/1.8 and the 70-300 VR. These are (relatively!) inexpensive lenses that are quite good and the three together basically cover every usual situation. I think the whole set could be gotten for just under $1000. With a D90 that is crop equivalent coverage of 24mm to 450mm plus a low light lens.<br>

The 35/1.8 is also a great lens. and for faster autofocus, bumping you up a few hundred, is the AF-S 50/1.4. </p>

<p>The Tamron 17-50/2.8 is affordable and has a good reputation. Add the 85/1.8 and again you're covered.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>16-85 inexpensive? It's $630 for $300 worth of kit lens plus $10 worth of metal. It was nice back when all the kit lenses didn't have VR, but now, save your money. If your camera came with the 18-105 already, don't buy the 16-85.</p>

<p>The 70-300 VR is great if you want a lot of tele or shoot FX or film, if not it's another needless expense over the 55-200, which is just as good at what it does. The 50/1.8 is a great lens for a film camera - on DX it's more specialized.</p>

<p>I am a bit confused by the "as I see them thrue the finder" part - what's the problem you're experiencing? With an DSLR the finder sees what the sensor sees, though the DOF can come out differently and exposure and camera settings have an influence over what comes out in the image file - but that's not because of the lens.</p>

[pictureted]

<p>In my opinion the 16-85 is worth every penny and pairs perfectly with the 70-300 VR. I'd also recommend the 35/1.8 rather than the 50, since the focal length is more useful on DX for most uses.</p>

[wmervine]

<p>Hey guys. Shall we rather wait for Ramona to tell us what lenses they have and what their issues are? That way we can specifically address their needs.<br>

I must say though most of the suggestions are quite good. Just need to figure out which would be the most applicable.</p>

[ramona_hanser]

<p>Thank you all soo much for trying to help.</p>

<p>Here the info on my Lens I got:</p>

<p>I have a 55-200mm 1;4-5.6<br>

a 18-105 mm 1; 3.5-5.6<br>

and a 70-300mm 4-5.6</p>

<p>nothing on a lower f./ lens, which I am really sure I will need it for the kind of photos I really would love to caputre in there real beauty without working too much on LR or PS.<br>

Thanks again!!</p>