Help camera geeks

[Moriath]

I have a Nikon D50 but only have a couple of lenses

A 18- 55 mm Nikor lens and a 70-300mm Sigma

What lenses do you have and what lenses would be good to compliment those i already have. ?

Ta

 

[Ch3tan]

I'm too poor to afford lenses. I need a good zoom lens, and a wide angle lens. A wide angle lens should be all you need.

 

[DaGaffer]

Those lenses cover the basics, after that it kind of depends what kind of photography you want to do...

 

[Sparx]

yeah all depends on the use, it also depends on how low you can get the fstop too

For an all rounder i would say 18-55 but if you are going for range then the other

the lense i use the most is my 10-20mm wide angle but then i spent most of my time in clubs so you need a closer range than a 200mm lol

 

[old.user4556]

A 18- 55 mm Nikor lens and a 70-300mm Sigma

What lenses do you have and what lenses would be good to compliment those i already have. ?

Ask yourself this: what are you not currently getting out of your existing lenses? Are they not sharp enough? Not long enough? Not got big enough apertures?

You've got from 18mm to 300mm covered (which is 27mm to 450mm in the 35mm format) so that's plenty unless you want to go wider (then you're nearly into fish eye) or longer which is into expensive super telephotos.

Lenses, in my opinion and experience, make the biggest impact on image quality in photography. However, the D50 is only 6 megapixels which isn't going to really make the most out of a top spec lens unless you're wanting big prints. However, if you don't want big prints then you're probably wasting your money upgrading the body, in which case upgrading your lenses is also a waste.

From my own lens array (starting from the widest), I have:

- Pentax 10mm-17mm f/3.5 fish-eye / super-wide zoom, great for urban abstracts and some landscapes.
- Pentax 17mm-70mm f/4 zoom, my main lens for landscape and as a "walk about" lens as it covers wide angle into low end telephoto. It also has a silent focus mechanism.
- Pentax 50mm f/1.7 prime, an utterly excellent prime lens for low light portraits and creamy smooth depth of field bokeh.
- Pentax 80mm-200mm f/4.5 zoom telephoto.
- Sigma 100mm-300mm f/4 zoom telephoto, just waiting on this arriving, it will replace my 80mm-200mm permanently.

The lens that I like the most that really taught me about photography was my fixed focal length (prime), manual focus 50mm f/1.7. I learned about bokeh, depth of field, exposure and the manual mode on my camera more than I ever had with an autofocus zoom lens. It also wet my appetite for portaits and low light photography (big aperture that you don't get on zooms). Maybe something like that might do the same for you? It might get you to learn about photography more instead of a "point and squirt" lens?

So with all that in mind, what are you looking to get out of new/different lenses?

 

[milou]

As Big G says, a standard 50mm prime.

 

[Wazzerphuk]

Aye a good 50mm makes all the difference.

I want a wide angle lens. They're so sexy.

I'm tempted to revert back to my 1950s Praktica and go buy some Ilford B/W film. Got a negative scanner so all I'd need is someone to develop the negative rolls. It's the best camera in the world, nearly 60 years old and in perfect working order. Got a great 28mm for it, too. They really don't make cameras like they used to.

 

[Ch3tan]

I'm hoping to get my dad's old slr repaired, the battery connectors are damaged (leak), but he has 4 flashes and about 6 lenses. Failing that I'm going to look into getting an old slr that that will fit the lenses.

 

[Moriath]

sounds good i been wondering about a 50mm prime lense and they aint too expensive

i bought the camera when 6mega pixels was the pick of the crop its been beaten by all the 12ones that are out not i know but i like the body and dont think i will notice much difference at the sizes i print off etc

A wide angle lens would be yummy also

Do the fish eyes distort the photo ?

 

[old.user4556]

Very much so. Here's one of mine.

 

[Ch3tan]

Got a negative scanner so all I'd need is someone to develop the negative rolls.

How much was the negative scanner and is it any good?

 

[old.user4556]

A wide angle lens would be yummy also

Yes, wide angles can also be very useful.

 

[Moriath]

So one of these

Nikon Nikkor Wide-angle lens - 28 mm - F/2.8 - Nikon F

andone of these

Nikon Nikkor Lens - 50 mm - F/1.8 - Nikon F

would be good

 

[Ch3tan]

You'll need a much wider angle than that if you want one, your current lens does 28mm already.

 

[Moriath]

hmm oksomehting like that then ...bit more expensive hehe save my pennies i think

http://www.ciao.co.uk/SIGMA_Zoom_lens__6461001

 

[Rubber Bullets]

I have a D200 and exactly that lens, the 10-20mm Sigma.

I really like it, and you can get some stunning shots, but yes it does distort, though nothing like a fisheye.

The quality isn't the best, but you do get what you pay for, though the variation is also noticeable. The first I bought was pretty good, with acceptable (if not good) sharpness right to the corners of a shot. Sadly the motor died o in the first week and so it was swapped with another that has stayed healthy, but doesn't have quite as good sharpness. This is a pisser, but the Nikon equivalent is much more expensive, and actually printed or resized for web shots will virtually never really suffer from the imperfections.

I also own a 50mm f1.4. It's a bit more expensive than the f1.8 and a bit bigger, but they are both capable of taking stunning shots in low light and with smooth and very blurred backgrounds. One advantage that you have with the D50 (iirc) is that it has an on board focussing motor. This was left out of the subsequent D40 D60 etc and means that you will get autofocus with these older design lenses.

The sad thing is that decent lenses cost a lot of money. I have 7 in my collection, of which maybe 4 are really good, large aperture quality glass. And that includes the 50mm and an 85mm f1.8 that are both relatively cheap. eBay contains very few bargains, as quality glass retains it's value very well.

On one final note, consider a good flash. The inbuilt one isn't great and the difference to indoor shots with a proper bounce flash is priceless.

RB

 

[Wazzerphuk]

How much was the negative scanner and is it any good?

I got it a few years ago, was about £275 I think. It's one of the normal scanners with little adaptions that allow you to scan negatives, a Canoscan 8000F. I've found it to be a pretty good normal and negative scanner. No doubt you could probably get something similar that is technically better these days for around the same moneys (or even less).

 

[Ch3tan]

I got it a few years ago, was about £275 I think. It's one of the normal scanners with little adaptions that allow you to scan negatives, a Canoscan 8000F. I've found it to be a pretty good normal and negative scanner. No doubt you could probably get something similar that is technically better these days for around the same moneys (or even less).

Quite a few canon scanners on their ebay refurb shop, might try my luck.

 

[Moriath]

I have a D200 and exactly that lens, the 10-20mm Sigma.

I really like it, and you can get some stunning shots, but yes it does distort, though nothing like a fisheye.

The quality isn't the best, but you do get what you pay for, though the variation is also noticeable. The first I bought was pretty good, with acceptable (if not good) sharpness right to the corners of a shot. Sadly the motor died o in the first week and so it was swapped with another that has stayed healthy, but doesn't have quite as good sharpness. This is a pisser, but the Nikon equivalent is much more expensive, and actually printed or resized for web shots will virtually never really suffer from the imperfections.

I also own a 50mm f1.4. It's a bit more expensive than the f1.8 and a bit bigger, but they are both capable of taking stunning shots in low light and with smooth and very blurred backgrounds. One advantage that you have with the D50 (iirc) is that it has an on board focussing motor. This was left out of the subsequent D40 D60 etc and means that you will get autofocus with these older design lenses.

The sad thing is that decent lenses cost a lot of money. I have 7 in my collection, of which maybe 4 are really good, large aperture quality glass. And that includes the 50mm and an 85mm f1.8 that are both relatively cheap. eBay contains very few bargains, as quality glass retains it's value very well.

On one final note, consider a good flash. The inbuilt one isn't great and the difference to indoor shots with a proper bounce flash is priceless.

RB

Thanks nice to know .. now to keep my fingers crossed that we get a bonus this year ... doubt it tho :/

 

[old.user4556]

I hear a lot of good things about the Sigma 10mm-20mm.

 

[old.user4556]

My Sigma 100-300mm f/4 arrived the other day, haven't had much chance to get out with it yet, but early tests show it to be a very good lens indeed. There were rumbling thunderstorms around this evening and large storm clouds, so I stuck the lens out the window and snapped this:

 

[Moriath]

nice piccie