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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 21, 2011, 10:11 PM   #1
Member
 
gabbyone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 56
Default New here...:)

I have a nikon d90. I have the 50mm 1.8 lens, which I love. The type of photography I do 1. Animal portraits for local rescues and fundraisers. I've done well with my 50mm. with the animal photography.

2. Child photography, the grands and grands of friends. I love taking candid shots. I would like a lens that will do nice close up shots, aka facial . I thought about the nikon 60mm macro, but I understand it's such a sharp lens the background isn't that pretty.

I was thinking the nikon 85mm 1.8. Isn't this the same lens I have, except a longer focal length? I understand it produces pretty head/shoulder shots. Will it do close up? Or should I consider the 85mm macro? I like the tamron 90's photo samples, except I heard it does not do well on the nikon d0.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. I'm so confused.

Gabby.
gabbyone is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 22, 2011, 4:34 PM   #2
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 58
Default

I also have the D90 with the 50 mm, and also the 18-105 zoom that comes with the camera. Have you thought about getting a zoom lens that also does macro? I am actually looking into getting one (though I am on a very limited budget) but I like the idea of having the versatility, Especially if any of your grandchildren do or will do any sports where a zoom would be advantageous. Just something to consider, I am not an expert on lens options so I can't make any recommendations.
las7828 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2011, 7:59 PM   #3
Member
 
gabbyone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 56
Default

The zoom would be wonderful. I'm on a limited budget as well.
I ended up with just the camera body then purchased the 50mm. I had the d40 and a couple lenses but had to sell to pay a bill. That was a nice little camera, too. Wish I had my old lenses.
gabbyone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2011, 11:40 PM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 58
Default

This is the next lens that I am looking into getting,

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...5_6_Di_LD.html

It is on the long end of the range starting at 70mm, but it can do macro shooting as well. Another thing you might consider is something that will give you some range below the 50mm level. I know with my 50mm I occasionally find that I can't back up enough to get everything I want in the frame and have to switch to my 18-105mm lens. So you might think about what your priorities would be and how often you feel like you need to either zoom in or out on your 50mm, I really like the range on my 18-105mm, it does great inside for pictures in tight areas and also good at the zoo where I am zooming in a lot. I thought I would want a long zoom, but really when it gets down to it, I feel 105mm is fine for me for most of my needs. I'm looking at the 70-300 more for the macro and sports shooting ability, but I don't know if that would be my priority if I didn't already have my 18-105 lens, so you might look for something that will give you more versatility that way.

I find if you ask a detailed question about specific lenses you can get a lot of great information here, especially when trying to compare your options.
las7828 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2011, 6:29 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
tizeye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 382
Default

Now that I know the 50 is your sole lens, assuming your budget is $425 which is what the 85 1.8 that you are considering costs. I hadn't heard problems with the Tamron 90 2.8 on the Nikon, and it stands out in the macro field and would be my choice (behind the standard setting but costly Nikon 105) and before Nikons 85 3.5 Macro (not to be confused with Nikons 85 1.8).

Nothing wrong with primes. 'Back in the day' when primes were preferred over the early telephoto, the classic consumer combo was 28 - 50 - 135, with a 75 for portraits. Converting to the 1.5 crop, the 50 that you have has the equivalent FOV as the 75 which is why you have good experience with portraits, plus the 1.8 (or 1.4) gives better DOF for portraits than any 3.5 kit lens would. The "new" focal length that approximates the FOV for the full frame 50 is Nikons 35 1.8 DX. Now back to the 80 1.8...it's FOV is approx 128 which provides the short telephoto capability.

Zooms have improved significantly and the excel in convenience while primes are affordable fast glass. Nikon's 16-85 would probably be a budget buster, but a particually affordable lens - with lower build quality to the 16-85 - would be the kit lens that typically comes with the D90, the 18-105. While it lists for $399, this white box at $279 is probably the best deal. http://www.abesofmaine.com/item.do?i...VROB&&kbid=%2a That is at or below gray market pricing. "White Box" has full Nikon USA warranty, and is literally a white box instead of the glossy retail box.

An alternative would be replacing the D40 lens that you sold with the 18-55 and 55-200 (or newer 55-300) for about the same price as the 80 1.8. It all depends on what you want to do. Going the fooom route, the are variable aperature 3.5-5.6 which supports general everyday stuff and you still have the superb 50 prime. Getting the 85 (or Tamron 90 if macro is also important) instead of the zooms would give you 2 superb primes and the start for a great collection. Backfilling with the 35 1.8 (and possibly the 20 2.8 for wide angle), and the one I drool over, the (costly) 300 f4 prime. Less costly on the telephoto end, if not the 55-300, then either the Tamron or Nikon 70-300 but not the particular Tamron linked above. See the related thread for an extened discussion of the Tamron/Nikon 70-300 VR models. The link posted earlier is not a VR model which is particurally beneficial with telephoto.
tizeye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2011, 8:40 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,093
Default

I would give serious consideration to the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 lens for this application. It really looks lie a very attracive lens. I should add that I don't have this lens, but I have been lusting after it recently.
tclune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2011, 3:38 PM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 58
Default

One thing to note, the lens I posted will shoot macro, while the 70-300 VR isn't listed as shooting macro, so if the ability to shoot macro is what you are looking for, then that might not be the right way to go for you.

I do really like my 18-105mm lens, that was mentioned above, and I think that would be a decent option as far as giving you the most versatility while you expand your collection. I personally plan on getting several more prime lenses down the road. I really like shooting in them. I think right now my goal is a macro lens that fits in my budget, which is why I am considering the 70-300 lens I listed. I am not as interested in the extreme telephoto range.
las7828 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2011, 8:27 PM   #8
Member
 
gabbyone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 56
Default

WOW, you guys/gals are awesome. I appreciate everyone's input. I still get a bit lost with what one lens does over the other, but I find the more I research to purchase a lens I learn so much more.

I'm not sure why someone, I only heard this in the flicker group for the tamron 90, said the 90mm macro did not work well on the D90. I've heard nothing but good things and the photos seem a bit nicer then the nikon 85 macro samples I've seen.

I do not shoot much inside my home as it's very small. Nine hundred sq ft does not give a lot of shoot room. LOL. So unless I'm playing with dogger pics inside or doing some still life , I mostly shoot outside.

I"m not sure why I didn't get the kit lens, the 18-105. I opted for the 50mm. I've heard great things about the kit lens. I have just always wanted the 50 prime.

You have all given me so much to think about and research. Thank you.

(sending chocolate out as a thank you )
gabbyone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2011, 8:33 PM   #9
Member
 
gabbyone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 56
Default

Tizeye
I like the tamron 90 sample photos over the nikon 85 macro photos. I believe you are saying you do as well? They just seem "prettier"
gabbyone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2011, 8:45 PM   #10
Member
 
gabbyone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 56
Default

I had the 35mm 1.8 for my D40. Would this be a better lens for outside, or inside, as far as room goes? Not having to back up as much? It was a nice lens. I could shoot myself but I needed the cash....sort of fast. Sick dog.
gabbyone 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 9:14 PM.