Nikon d-50 new lens suggestions.

[Drake]

I'm new to photography and currently have a nikon d-50 and still learning the ropes of photography but would you suggest for a good lens. I am usually taking pictures where I need to zoom in pretty close or to see stuff far away. I think I need a "zoom lens" lol not sure.

Suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

[cyclohexane]

What do you have right now?

Break down, with specific examples, what you want to shoot.

Welcome to the Camel.

[Rokcet Scientist]

Originally Posted by Drake

[...] I am usually taking pictures where I need to zoom in pretty close or to see stuff far away. [...]

Hi Drake,
welcome to the board and photography.
Could you be more specific about what kind of photos you would like to make with that lens? Sports? Portraits? Nature? Architecture? Kids?
Please expand to give us something to go on.

[Drake]

Nikon D50

AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm

Sandisk Ultra II 2gig

I will be shooting paintbal photography not sure if you know what that is.

Example:

[cyclohexane]

There's one Nikkor every Nikon user shooting live events should own, or at least aspire to own, and that's the 70-200mm f/2.8G AF-S VR. The 80-200mm f/2.8D AF or 80-200mm f/2.8D AF-S are acceptable substitutes, but the 70-200mm VR kills the two older lenses on bokeh and light fall-off. This lens is my event workhorse.

The shots you posted by Steven Y. say "75mm" in the EXIF data, which means he's still fairly close to his subjects even on his 20D. If you're further back, you should definitely have something that covers the 70-200mm range.

Since you said you're new to photography, I'll leave the discussion of equivalent views on digital vs. film out, as you don't really need to take that in consideration if you don't have a film background, and are new.

[Drake]

Alright thanks a lot. I think it is a little to late to start with a film camera. The lens u posted is like 1,000 would I need to get a better camera or just stick with the one i got any get a new lens...Not sure how the d-50 ranks against the rest.

[Rokcet Scientist]

Whaddayareckon, hydro, would a protective underwater housing take a 70-200mm lens? * *
Sure seems an indispensible piece of gear amidst flyin' paintballs, don' it?

[Rokcet Scientist]

Originally Posted by Drake

Alright thanks a lot. I think it is a little to late to start with a film camera.

You can make videos with that D50, afaik.

[cyclohexane]

I've drowned my 70-200mm unprotected in a downpour without ill effect. I'd just screw-on a filter to protect against front impacts (done this before, no issues with breaking filters, but I only took one hit from a less lethal projectile), and use the hood. Also, the whole point of suggesting a 70-200 was to get him out of the path of the paintballs. =)

[dvdowns]

The D50 is a good camera , no need to get another camera if you get a good lens . The 18-200VR is a good all-round lens if you are just starting . From there you could decide where you might want to specialize . With a decent lens and the D50 very few people would be able to tell your images apart from a really expensive camera in most conditions .

[eClix]

I would also consider an used 80-200 2.8 AF (one can get the slide zoom ones for significantly less) or a 80-200 2,8 AF-S. I've heard that the 80-200 AF-S is actually quicker at focusing, but how much faster could it be? I guess the VR could show focusing in some situations I guess.

[cyclohexane]

I've actually already talked to Drake about this. The 70-200 is way out of his price range, and even an old used 80-200mm f/2.8D AF is pushing it; he wasn't interested in the push-pull version. The AF-S speed is most noticeable when using a body with slow screwdrive motor; a body using the old high-end screwdrive motor can actually drive small lenses faster than lenses using the AF-S SWM, but it was real hard on the lenses, and not as accurate as the current one found in the D2/F6 bodies.

VR, used correctly, improves focusing. The trick is, activate VR and let it settle before focusing (disable shutter release focusing; use AF-ON or AE-L button, depending on camera), and then the AF speed won't be any different than without VR on. VR's handy for lowlight AF, because the stabilized image will give the AF CCD (or in the D2 bodies, the three CCDs) a bit more contrast to work with, and your AF should be a tad more accurate.

[badpickev]

dont know what his price rance does entail

70-200 f2.8 hsm sigma $750-$800
70-210 f2.8 sigma/tamron used $425
70-210 f3.5-4.5 sigma used $150

[rootrider]

Originally Posted by badpickev

70-200 f2.8 hsm sigma $750-$800
70-210 f2.8 sigma/tamron used $425
70-210 f3.5-4.5 sigma used $150

Nikon 70-210 f/4-5.6 AF $130 or so on KEH
and you can get the f/4 for not too much more.

[dvdowns]

In New Zealand the Nikon 70-300G lens is only about NZ$199 which would be about US$130 brand new .

[Rokcet Scientist]

You'll probably get what you pay for . . .

[Marc Kurth]

Given the budget constraints, I can’t help but think of the Nikon 70-300ED.* No, it’s not in the same league as the others – but it can produce decent images in capable hands. Learn to shot within it's limits and it will sing.

The most important feature is the low price for good reach. Play with one and decide if it's worth the $200-$250 used price - or $300. new. Many people feel that he "G" version is just as good, but I strongly disagree.

A bunch of basic snapshots from mine before I sold it. All handheld and all images (except one image) were taken with D70's.
http://morrobayphotos.com/Snapshots/


Here is one 300mm I took while sitting on my mountain bike.