bwamos
12-11-2008, 09:10 PM
Well.. I've been doing a ton of looking around and am set on the camera I want to "grow into". I've decided on the Nikon D300.
Now, I'm just trying to decide on the best lense as a starter lense. Your basic wide-tele zoom w/ good characteristics without breaking the bank quite yet.. lol.
The two main culprits I'm looking at are:
AF Zoom-Nikkor 24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF (3.5x) (http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/zoom/af_zoom24-85mmf_28-4d_if/index.htm)
AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED (5.0x) (http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/zoom/af-s_vr_zoom24-120mmf_35-56g_if/index.htm)
These both seem like good choices.
1st one I beleive is a slightly "faster" lense w/ a bit sharper focus and it has f2.8 availiable at 24mm. However is is not an AF-S lense. Not silent of course, but is that the only downfall. of the AF vs. AF-S? It also isn't a VR lense. And being a basic cover-most lense would the 20-120 VR be a better option.
I haven't been able to find any direct comparisons or reccomendations, so I'm not sure.
I can get both for about the same price w/ the 24-85 f2.8-4D being about $50 higher. Both in the $500 range. Someday I may end up with some $1500+ lenses but I have a LOT of learning and experience to get before I get to that point. ;)
My second purchase I think will be the SB-900 speed light.
Other reccomendations for lenses, etc. are certianly welcome.
Thanks for reading through my rambling, lol.
Another one that seems highly reccomended for a great all around lense is the: AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED (11.1x)
(http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/dx/af-s_dx_vr_zoom18-200mmf_35-56g_if/index.htm) This one would cover about 90% of everything I'd need. It's about $50 more than the other two, but may be woth it to have the extra telephoto capability.
Downfall is that one is a DX lense that wouldn't be compatible with a full format camera.. but if I ever upgrade to that, I'd imagine I have much better lenses by that point.. lol.
Thoughts?
Now, I'm just trying to decide on the best lense as a starter lense. Your basic wide-tele zoom w/ good characteristics without breaking the bank quite yet.. lol.
The two main culprits I'm looking at are:
AF Zoom-Nikkor 24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF (3.5x) (http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/zoom/af_zoom24-85mmf_28-4d_if/index.htm)
AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED (5.0x) (http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/zoom/af-s_vr_zoom24-120mmf_35-56g_if/index.htm)
These both seem like good choices.
1st one I beleive is a slightly "faster" lense w/ a bit sharper focus and it has f2.8 availiable at 24mm. However is is not an AF-S lense. Not silent of course, but is that the only downfall. of the AF vs. AF-S? It also isn't a VR lense. And being a basic cover-most lense would the 20-120 VR be a better option.
I haven't been able to find any direct comparisons or reccomendations, so I'm not sure.
I can get both for about the same price w/ the 24-85 f2.8-4D being about $50 higher. Both in the $500 range. Someday I may end up with some $1500+ lenses but I have a LOT of learning and experience to get before I get to that point. ;)
My second purchase I think will be the SB-900 speed light.
Other reccomendations for lenses, etc. are certianly welcome.
Thanks for reading through my rambling, lol.
Another one that seems highly reccomended for a great all around lense is the: AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED (11.1x)
(http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/dx/af-s_dx_vr_zoom18-200mmf_35-56g_if/index.htm) This one would cover about 90% of everything I'd need. It's about $50 more than the other two, but may be woth it to have the extra telephoto capability.
Downfall is that one is a DX lense that wouldn't be compatible with a full format camera.. but if I ever upgrade to that, I'd imagine I have much better lenses by that point.. lol.
Thoughts?