New to SLR need advice on Lenses

[michael_sole]

<p>Hi All, I have recently ordered a D3200 ad I am very excited. I realize its a low end model but it seems to have some high end power. The kit I purchased comes with this lense:</p>

<p>18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX VR Nikkor Zoom Lens (Black)<br>

<br>

I would like to start investigating other lenses as I have read that this will "only get me so far"<br>

I anticipate that I will probably reach that point in a few months.<br>

Since this is my first foray into SLR camera's I am probably guessing pretty hard but having gone through a new point and shoot camera every 18 months for the last 10 years I can say I am ready to make the plunge. None of those PNS have ever really satisfied my creative urges. I've spent several months research which camera to buy and I was very close to getting the d5100 but the 3200 felt like the right choice for me (I think I will never go past "prosumer" level).<br>

Some of the lenses I am considering are:<br>

Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6G AF Nikkor SLR Camera Lens <br>

and perhaps (from what i have read) a 35mm lens (not sure which).<br>

So again, suggestions on affordable lenses for someone just getting into SLR photography and perhaps a primer on what all these different lenses do.<br>

PS I will be taking a few photography course but would like to start researching now my options. I am just a a little psycho like that. Plus I am the king of the internet deal so I never know what I will find.<br>

Any and all advice is appreciated.<br>

Thanks,<br>

Mike</p>

[rick_m.]

<p>Welcome to DSLRs.</p>

<p>It would be a mistake to consider the D3200 a "low end" camera. It is far more capable than Nikons finest DSLR from just a few years ago. The "gear heads" here might try to get to you but I can assure you that it will take stunning pictures. </p>

<p>Your kit lens is surprisingly good. It gives you a good range to start with. I would add a telephoto and the one you mention is fine. The non VR version is a decent lens to start out with and the online price used is about $100.00. Just remember with this lens to hold the camera steady and keep your shutter speed above about 1/500th when you are zoomed out and you will be fine. Or you can pony up some more money and get the VR version and shoot a bit slower. Remember that VR has no effect on your subject so if you are shooting a moving subject keep the shutter speed up anyway. </p>

<p>I will launch a preemptive strike on whoever was contemplating a lecture on where the D3200 becomes diffraction limited. (F/5.6 or below FWIW.) Unless you are going to abandon real photography for a life of pixel peeping then ignore this. If you can't resist then get a 35mm F1.8G for normal use or a 50mm F1.8g for portraits in which for some reason you want your grandma's cute little moustache to jump from the page. </p>

<p>You said the magic word when you mentioned that you were going to take a few photography courses. In them you will see what you need far better than we can guess. You have a great camera. Take tons of pictures and have fun. DSLR shooting is a whole new thing. </p>

[Two23]

<p>The way I approach buying lenses is to first nail down what I want to photo, and under what conditions. Always start with what & how you photo, and everything will fall into place. I don't consider the D3200 to be a low end camera either.<br>

Kent in SD</p>

[kohanmike]

<p>I suggest you get the AF-S 70-300 VR, an excellent lens. The AF version you mention will not auto focus on the D3200.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>I would shoot with that lens for a while before buying anything else. That said, a logical next step would be</p>

<p>70-300 VR if you find yourself wishing you could go longer.<br>

35mm f1.8 DX if you find yourself wanting to shoot in available light<br>

SB700 or some such flash if you find yourself using flash a lot and getting tired of the harsh direct flash of the built-in model.</p>

<p>Way down on the list (for most people) is an ultra-wide, like one of the 8/10/11/12 - 16/20/24 models form Nikon, Sigma and Tokina.</p>

[kgavin]

<p>Congrats on the purchase, and don't feed into some of the things you read about this "entry-level" kit only taking you so far. Four years ago, I started with pretty much the same thing (a D60 and an 18-55 VR) to use on a vacation to Jericoacoara. After going deep into many different types of photography since and purchasing additional equipment, I still look at those photos with amazement. Some of that creativity that I had just started out has turned into something so clinical now that I do a lot of other types of photography.</p>

<p>That said, I would go out and shoot with the 18-55 and get a great feel for what you like. One thing I purchased along with the D60 kit was a 35mm f/1.8 DX lens, which is a great buy for your camera, and my most used lens while I shot DX. This lens can give you some freedom to experiment with depth of field.</p>

<p>In writing all of this, I'm going to glue my 50mm lens to my FX camera when I'm not shooting a paid gig and just enjoy myself again. :-)</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Ditto on the advice not to underestimate what you can do with your new camera..</p>

<p>Also ditto on the need to shoot rather than collect more lenses. The 18-55 is a fine lens and will serve you for a long time. </p>

<p>Depending on what you end up shooting the most, you may want to go for either a telephoto zoom (there's a nice, "kit" inexpensive one that is also a fine lens in its own right), or an "ultrawide" lens, but you don't need them until you <em>really</em> feel that your kit is lacking some capabilities. Too many people buy all kinds of lenses before they know what they will actually use.</p>

[jim_jones3]

<p>The D3100 and its kit lens surprised me in the quality of their images. The D3200 should be worth the extra price. Like Kenneth, I often use a Nikon 35mm f/1.8 DX, and less often, the 70-300mm. The latter may not be quite as sharp as the other two lenses at 300mm, but I haven't determined if it is my technique or the lens that is the limit.</p>

[evannorth]

<p>the vr version of the 70-300mm has different, better optics than the non vr version. or so i am told.</p>

[michael_sole]

<p>Guys thank you very much, this is the kind of information I was looking for. I am sure the kit lens that comes with will take me far and I will be taking some photoclasses and reading books but I also like to study the tech on things. So I now have stuff to look at as well. I get my new rig tomorrow, CAN'T WAIT!</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Congratulations on a nice buy :-)</p>

<p>I wouldn't get anything additional yet. There is a lot of exceptional work shot with a 18-55VR - it really is no bad lens (despite many claims otherwise all over the internet). It covers a very useful range, optically sound... So, just start to use it, and see how it works for you. Yes, you might very well bump into limits of this lens at some point (months, years, who knows) - but at that point you have a much better idea which limit this lens is imposing on you. Maybe you need a telelens, maybe a wider lens, maybe a lens with wider aperture as the 35 f/1.8, maybe a flash... who knows?<br>

Better to first figure out what you need, and then get the approriate solution.</p>

[michael_sole]

<p>So I had a chance to read through what you've posted and I have begun looking at lenses. This is a first foray into this hobby. I tend to take my hobby;s pretty serious (you should see my recording studio) but photography its just something I enjoy. My father was very good back in the 70/80's. I remember being fascinated but his albums. I wish I had them now, I would share. I was always so disappointed with what I took with my point and shoot. I ended up with a CoolPix L120 and the only thing it did well was close ups of flowers and the occasional portrait. I think with all the PNS's I've bought I probably could of had an SLR already, even when they were much more expensive.<br>

I'll still take pictures of flowers, but I also like landscapes and of course my kids. So I wouldn't the 18-55 be able to take 35MM photos? Or is it a 35MM "better at its job"?<br>

So which lense would "theoretically" be best for landscapes, portraits and close ups?<br /><br />I truly apologize if these are noob questions (I am sure they are) but these are some of the basics I am trying to get my head around.<br /><br />I found a local photo shop that seems to have a good class. Surprisingly none of the community schools have them, perhaps the community college?<br>

Anyway, thanks for boosting my confidence on the 3200. It seemed like a very good deal but I wanted something good MUCH more than something cheap.</p>

[kohanmike]

<p>There is no one lens that will do good landscape, portrait and closeup well, but the 18-55 will get decent landscape on the 18mm end and reasonable portrait with the 55mm end. For closeup, you will need to get as close as you can for focus, then crop the image on your computer later. To fulfill everything you want with very good quality, you would need three lenses; one of the real wide angles that range between 10 to 24mm for landscape, for portrait on a Dx camera it would be a lens around 90 to 105, then a dedicated macro lens, 45 to 90mm.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Michael Kohan is right that there is no "do-it-all" lens that does everything good, and that the 18-55 is a good place to start. It can do what you want: landscape, close-up flowers and portraits. Yes, there are better options, but getting all the "best" options will drown your wallet quicker than you might imagine.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>So I wouldn't the 18-55 be able to take 35MM photos? Or is it a 35MM "better at its job"?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, the 18-55 can be set to a 35mm, and take a photo that has the same angle of view as the fixed 35mm f/1.8 lens. The difference is the aperture - the 18-55 is ~f/4.5 at 35mm, while the 35mm f/1.8 can open up to f/1.8. This allows the fixed 35mm to deliver photos with a very shallow DoF, or allow you to work in very low light (as it can let more light in). It is better at its job, but its job is far less versatile than the 18-55's job.<br>

I can fully understand the nice anticipation of getting gear, and dreaming about more gear. But seriously, hold your horses a bit. First get your feet wet with this camera. Follow the course you found, it'll sure help you get up to speed, and understand what difference a f/1.8 35mm lens may have on your photography versus a f/4.5 - and whether that matters enough<em> to you </em>to spend any money on. In the end, any lens you get needs to fit your style of photography and your needs - otherwise you might get a lot of great expensive lenses with excellent test reports, that stay at home because you do not have any use for them.</p>

[michael_sole]

<p>So I got my camera today and took a few pictures with auto mode of my kids and I can tell there is an immediate improvement but of course not much more at this stage. I obviously need to learn my gear; which I am very engaged in doing.<br>

I feel I should clarify my questions.<br>

a. I am not looking to buy anything at this point, probably not for months or longer but I do want to research options. So this is why I am asking about lenses (since this is obviously what I will be buying).<br>

b. I don't think one lens could do portraits, landscapes and closeups more like I was wondering what lenses are "typically" used for those types of photos.<br>

The kit comes with a Vivatar macro 52MM lens and a telephoto lens of which I am not sure of the specs but it looks like it might be an attachment for the kit lens that I've mentioned.<br>

So far I've read one book, I am onto another. The kit comes with a DVD which I am watching as I make this post. However it focuses more on technology rather than technique. As a computer guy tech is the easy part to me, I want to be a better "photographer"<br>

Lastly, I registered for a 2 part class later on this month. <br>

I can already tell that I am going to have a ton of fun with this and again, I thank all of you for your input. I have book marked this thread as it contains a lot of useful suggestions and advice and I suspect I will refer to it quite a bit. Anymore that anyone wants to offer is, of course, super appreciated.</p>

[michael_sole]

<p>So just like I promised this is a test shot on portrait mode of my oldest daughter using the kit lens. I haven't even begun to explore manual modes yet but I will very soon.</p>

<p><img src="https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/886562_10200777224938500_1656892413_o.jpg" alt="" width="2048" height="1362" /></p>