Looking for a lens recommendation March 28
I know at least one of the people who reads this is a photographer, but I figured I’d throw this out there in case anyone wanders along.
I’m looking for a “fast-normal” lens recommendation, probably $200-$400 range, for a Nikon DX format camera. Here’s what I’m thinking my kit is going to be:
- Tokina 12-24mm
- Mystery Lens around 28 or 35 (prime is good, f/1.8 or f/2 also good)*
- Nikon 60mm Micro
- Tokina 80-400mm
The 12-24mm I own, the others I’m replacing existing gear with. Also, if anyone has the 80-400mm, I’d love to hear what you think of it.
*Poking around on BH, there’s the AF Nikkor 35mm f/2, which seems to fit the bill, but I’d still like to hear anyone’s suggestions.
Update 1: Well, DH’s link to me has certainly helped this thread (wasn’t expecting it when I posted this). Looks like the 35 f/2 will probably fit my bill, and I’m checking into the new Nikon 70-300 VR (that’s cheaper & lighter than the Tokina). Assuming a certain client of mine pays his invoices, all but the long lens will get purchased this month. I rented the 35 f/2 this weekend, but the aperture was sticky and I wasn’t really able to play with it.
Carsten Bockermann Mar 29
Hi Ben,
I have both the 35/2 AF Nikkor and the Sigma 30/1.4. Since I bought the Sigma the Nikkor sits in the closet. Image quality of the Sigma is excellent even wide open on a D200; also, it is supported by the DxO Optics Pro, which I use to reduce certain aberrations. Only downside is size and weight.
You can check my Cuba and India galleries on my website for some examples.
Carsten
Aaron Mar 29
I have the 35/2 Nikon and I’ve enjoyed it. It’s my normal lens on my D200. It’s great for dark light shooting, it’s super light weight and it’s great for 1/2 - 3/4 body shots.
Also have the Nikon 80-400. It’s awesome for a 5x zoom. It’s been my surfing photo lens for some time now & it backpacks pretty well, too. I’d love a 300/2.8 for surf photo but that price tag is an issue…
ben Mar 29
Someone has suggested (for telephoto) the Nikon 70-300mm VR– which is cheaper & lighter than the Tokina.
Actually, cheap enough in difference to get a Tamron Teleconverter (for the Micro & extending the reach on the 70-300), too.
Philip Hall Mar 29
Get the 35-70/2.8 . . . It’s an old design (push-pull zoom), but it’s razor sharp everywhere and every way.
My favorite lens. Period.
Pixxil Mar 30
Hey there Mate.
I am a Canon shooter, so have had fairly limited experience with the Nikkor Lenses, but having worked in a Photographic store in the past I can honestly say that nikon lenses are worth every cent. So I dont think you could go wrong with the 35mm f/2.0
I am unsure of the price in your part of the world, but you should consider the Sigma 30mm f/1.4. This lens I actually own and it is a real little stunner, and the first lens I reach for when a low light assignment comes along.
Plenty to think about I suppose.
Good luck and nice site too.
Pixxil
ben Mar 30
@Pixxil:
Thanks! I actually rented the 35mm f/2 for the weekend (shooting more quilts, and need something wider than 60mm for some of the bigger ones), so we’ll see how it goes.
I’m reluctant to buy a Sigma lens– I’ve been hearing some pretty good things about them, but my experiences and talking to random folks seem to support my desire to not buy more Sigma lenses.
I currently have a Sigma 28-70 and a 70-300mm, which are great lenses for the money, but I’m seeing lots of CA in the 28-70 and distortion and a lack of sharpness in the 70-300 (even in bright light & high shutter speed). Plus my 28-70 was gone for a few months b/c of a loose element. It was fixed under warranty, but I ended up having to pick up a quick replacement lens to tide me through my wedding & honeymoon.
So, I appreciate that Sigma might actually make some good lenses– I’ve heard good things about their DG EX lenses–but for entirely vain reasons, I’m avoiding them.