i need a lens
figured this would be a good place to post....
i have a nikon d50 and just need a kit lens or something a little better than a kit lens....i let my parents borrow my camera when they went on vacation and they returned it with a broken lens, lol
let me know what you have....i don't shoot professionally, so badassical lens' need not apply, unless they're cheap
-2001 Lexus IS300
-2004 Pontiac GTO - 530hp/625ft lbs - 10.62@130mph - Sold!
Originally Posted by Echonova
The 18-55mm is your basic lens that is good for the regular 2-5ft distance shots. But if you want something that zooms further I think Nikon makes an 18-250 which will give you a really good full range. Even though you're not shooting professionally I would stick with the Nikon brand. I've had the best luck with better photos sticking to the brand that makes the camera.
~Melissa~
[email protected]
www.competitionclutch.com
RIP Kaleb Mashburn - I will never forget you - 10/24/86 to 10/27/08
thanks melissa!
i received a best buy gift card today....so gonna see what they have to offer online here in a minute
-2001 Lexus IS300
-2004 Pontiac GTO - 530hp/625ft lbs - 10.62@130mph - Sold!
First you should figure out what you mean by "better" than the kit lens. Do you want better low light performance? More zoom range? Better image quality?
A super-zoom like the Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5–5.6 gives good focal range, but comes at a cost:
-You won't be able to squeeze the sharpest detail or best quality shots out of the camera
-There's some barrel distortion at the short end, and slow shutter speeds at the far end (which means bad performance in low light)
you're speaking jibberish, i don't shoot professionally....all i have is the kit lens and it's screwed up, so another kit lens would suffice, a longer range lens would be nice though, theyre $200 at BB...not sure i want to drop that much cash on a lens for a camera that i rarely use anymore
-2001 Lexus IS300
-2004 Pontiac GTO - 530hp/625ft lbs - 10.62@130mph - Sold!
lolcats
This is an example of barrel distortion. It is when you take a picture and lines that should be straight come out curved in the photo. Fish-eye lenses are designed to take pictures with a lot of barrel distortion.
I don't shoot professionally either, but the reason I got a DSLR camera was for:
1. Much sharper photos than I got with my ultracompact camera
2. Better quality photos in low light & high contrast than I got with my ultracompact camera
So, for me, using a super-zoom like an 18-200mm wouldn't make much sense. It might be different for you, though. If you aren't nit-picky about image quality or low light shots then the 18-200mm might be just what you want.
$200 is pretty dang cheap for a lens. Most decent lenses START at $300+ (the exception being 50mm prime lenses) for 3rd party lenses. Nikon lenses usually start around $500+. Nikon doesn't have a lot in the mid-range (compared to Canon).... you tend to either get an el cheapo poop lens or an exquisite lens that costs two arms and a leg.
3rd party is a good compromise.... I like Tamron lenses.
If you're looking to go cheapthen i'd consider the AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED or Tamron 17-50 f/2.8.
The 18-200 mentioned earlier is pretty pricey.
I have a 55-200mm Quantaray lens for Nikon that I am trying to get rid of$100 obo - c'mon, just throw me an offer if interested
Probably get better responce in the WTB section.
LISTEN TO ME
lol.
copy and paste the following into your google bar...
nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6
that was my first lens and i love it. it's not VR (vibration reduction. it's nikon's version of stability control. it comes on the lenses rather than the body of the camera and brings a prettier penny than a non-VR lens. it's nice, but if you don't have the money you can def. live without it). it zooms plenty far for your everyday shooter and will also be wide enough to get good wide shots. it's plastic so it's a good bit lighter than the more expensive stuff, but of course it's less durable. with the low aperture you won't be able to shoot in super dark conditions, but if you get a flash it will be just fine. just pick your battles. it's AF-s (which is a silent focus motor inside the lens vs. the clunky old stuff). I got mine on amazon refurbished for $249. it's been an amazing lens. plenty sharp enough and love the range on it. plus it's cheap as fuck so you can't beat that.
anyway. this is the best lens ever for the everyman photographer who just wants one lens.
Last edited by Mr. Clean; 01-08-2010 at 05:46 PM.
yes i used to have the same lens and i thought it was a pretty sharp lens for the money.
^ See, I like that guy.
^ Lol. I like you aight too.
see what KEH.com has for ya!
chads cool too i suppose.
I'm aiiiiight I guess
chads the worst
jay/kay
:::tosses D90 in trash can:::
what about the "nifty fifty"? 1.8 lens for $130.00 new!!!!!!!!!!!!!
also a very good lens, but not versatile at all. it's good for just a few shots.
cant beat having a little zoom.
thats why i posted this.
The 50 1.8 is a good, sharp lens that is good in low light conditions... but it is a fixed focal length lens (aka 'prime') which means that you can't zoom with it.
Unless you already know why you want/need a prime, stick with the 'zooms'.
Really, if you want ONE solution that you'll never have to think about again, just get a super-zoom.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
