Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 22, 2006, 4:54 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
D.Ann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,932
Default

Hi,

I am looking for a lens for the Nikon D80. My budget does not include the 18-200mm VR for now, any other suggestions for a sharp, fast all around lens...Thanks

Donna
D.Ann is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 24, 2006, 11:23 PM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 13
Default

I would say get a 35mm f/2. Sharp, fast, a very useful almost all around focal length. Then when you have enough for the 18-200, you will definitely keep the 35mm and you won't lose on a zoom replaced by the 18-200. Maybe add an 85 1.8 to round out the longer side. You'll keep that one too when you get the zoom.
matsumoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2006, 9:42 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

matsumoto wrote:
Quote:
I would say get a 35mm f/2. Sharp, fast, a very useful almost all around focal length. Then when you have enough for the 18-200, you will definitely keep the 35mm and you won't lose on a zoom replaced by the 18-200. Maybe add an 85 1.8 to round out the longer side. You'll keep that one too when you get the zoom.
Primes are sharp and great performers, but definetly do not fit into the category of all around. Primes are great for specific needs, but aren't versatile enough for walkaround use. Zooms offer more flexibility and can be had for the same prices. Although you give up some sharpness, you're not likely to noticce the shortcomings at normal print sizes.

Let me know your budget and shooting style and I can give more specific recommendations.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 26, 2006, 5:52 AM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 40
Default

Hi,

I bought a D80 with the Sigma DC 17-70mm (2.8-4.5) Macro and so far I'm very happy with it. Image quality is imo very good and it is versatile. Even macro photography is possible, but you cannot expect professional "high end" results...

Overall a good lens for a very good price!

http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/detail.asp?IDLens=241

http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22364


Regards,

Michael

michael1973 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 26, 2006, 9:53 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
D.Ann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,932
Default

Thanks everyone for your advice. Donna
D.Ann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 28, 2006, 12:57 AM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 13
Default

rjseeney wrote:
Quote:
matsumoto wrote:
Quote:
I would say get a 35mm f/2. Sharp, fast, a very useful almost all around focal length. Then when you have enough for the 18-200, you will definitely keep the 35mm and you won't lose on a zoom replaced by the 18-200. Maybe add an 85 1.8 to round out the longer side. You'll keep that one too when you get the zoom.
Primes are sharp and great performers, but definetly do not fit into the category of all around. Primes are great for specific needs, but aren't versatile enough for walkaround use. Zooms offer more flexibility and can be had for the same prices. Although you give up some sharpness, you're not likely to noticce the shortcomings at normal print sizes.

Let me know your budget and shooting style and I can give more specific recommendations.

Now, of course a zoom is more versatile. The 35mm focal length on a dslr is very neutral and many experienced shooters(not me) recommend shooting with a fixed focal length to build compositional skills. Maybe not what Donna was looking for, but if not the 18-200vr then what? And the point of the 35mm first was not as an all inclusive solution, but something that could be used for general shooting, with quality better than, faster than, lighter than any zoom in its price range. Shoot for a while with that and when some funding comes in, and it always does after you have made a compromise, add a 18-200, 18-70 or a 17-55, etc. There are many a time when I grab only the 35mm instead of my 17-55 and work to get my shot(s). Weight/image quality cannot be beat.
Donna did mention fast and sharp. Normal print sizes? Why would you assume she only is looking to print small. That's not to say that the zoom would suffer in a large print, but everyone loves a large, high quality print.
I have read and respect your advice greatly. I appreciate the time you spend to help out your fellow photographer, but I think some would benefit by getting the 35mm, although maybe not Donna, shoot for a while and then based upon there own experiences, make a decision of what they want in a zoom. I strongly believe that almost everyone that has owned a 35mm f/2 still has it, despite their 2.8 zoom. Of course this also my opinion just like the first post and is available for ridicule or scrutiny.
matsumoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2006, 12:31 AM   #7
Member
 
starriderrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 62
Default

I got a Nikkor 28-80mm G lense for my D80 body. It does it all in the 28-80mm Itis very sharp, crisp.Works well in low light. It's super small, has 58mm filter$80.00 for a mint used example. I think around $129.00 new.

I also purchased a Nikkor AF 50mm 1.8 D Less than $100.00 new !

I rec. the 28-80 for adaily walk about/mini zoom lense. Great detail. Price is right.VERY light.

This picture was taken @28mm ->Nikon D80
starriderrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2006, 8:16 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
D.Ann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,932
Default

Very nice, you have give me some good ideas...Donna
D.Ann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2006, 9:57 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Quote:
I got a Nikkor 28-80mm G lense for my D80 body. It does it all in the 28-80mm Itis very sharp, crisp.Works well in low light. It's super small, has 58mm filter$80.00 for a mint used example. I think around $129.00 new.
The 28-80g is generally regarded as one of the poorest "Kit" lenses Nikon has ever produced. It is small and lightweight, but build quality is very cheap and plasticky. It is also lacking the wide end on a DSLR, becoming a 42-120 after the crop factor. For the same price or slightly more, one could get the 18-55 DX which by all accounts is a better performer, although you'd give up the moderate tele end. Still, I think this is a much better choice than the above mentioned lens.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2006, 4:22 PM   #10
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 27
Default

How about the Nikkor 28-200? I used in on my D70. Not much in terms of wide angle (which is why I replaced it with the 18-200) but otherwise decent
runner77 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:39 PM.