Affordable lens for better shots?

j photog

Please forgive if you have seen this thread before. I am still working my way around the technology of a digital camera. And I'm on a bit of a budget.
what I would like is a lens that is fast enough for me to not use a flash. I use a Nikkon D50 and even though I get around using the flash by adjusting the settings, I still find myself not only limited for the look of the photo but also the range. I just don't know if I looking for a wide-angle lens or a telephoto lens.

Either one I believe can give me more diverse shots...and unique portraits. Any ideas? Or did I just ramble? Like I do...:hide

UT Scott

I'd recomend the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 here It's a great lens, and the f/1.8 will allow you to shoot in lower light.

DJ-S1

What lens(es) do you currently have?

j photog

DJ-S1 wrote:

What lens(es) do you currently have?

the one that comes with my camera: Nikkor 28-80mm

j photog

UT Scott wrote:

I'd recomend the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 here It's a great lens, and the f/1.8 will allow you to shoot in lower light.

thanks...what kind of range would that give me...im so not good with the tech stuff but am learning everyday.

j photog

i need to also say that i want diversity. a better range of shots than what i get now with the standard lens that came with my d50. im a desperate woman folks. help this po' girl out! litterally. po'.

UT Scott

you can zoom your 28-80 out to the 50 mark and that's how long the lens will be. It's not too short, and not too long, I almost always have it on my D50 and love it. It is a prime lens so you wont be able to zoom. If you are looking for a zoom how much are you willing to spend?

j photog

UT Scott wrote:

you can zoom your 28-80 out to the 50 mark and that's how long the lens will be. It's not too short, and not too long, I almost always have it on my D50 and love it. It is a prime lens so you wont be able to zoom. If you are looking for a zoom how much are you willing to spend?

i would like either a zoom lens or a wide-angle. i just want more of a range of shots...i can't spend more than $200.

UT Scott

j photog wrote:

i would like either a zoom lens or a wide-angle. i just want more of a range of shots...i can't spend more than $200.

For $200 i'm not sure you'll find much better than the 50 1.8. But I'm not sure, there maybe the perfect lens for you somewhere

Tommyboy

You want more range? Does that mean wider or more telephoto? The lens you have now reaches out a bit but has very little wide angle.

The 50mm f/1.8 (which was suggested) is a great idea. It would give you wonderful low-light capability and would be a good portrait/candid lens.

It would be hard to get a zoom with any speed (large aperature) for $200. I would invest in the 50 1.8 now and save for a zoom that is more to your liking.

That's my 0.02.

If you want wider with zoom and a budget lens, Nikon makes an 18-135. That would be a GREAT range but, like most economy zooms, it's pretty slow. It's f/3.5-5.6, but it's only $400. Something to think about. You'd still need the 50 for speed.

j photog

Tommyboy wrote:

You want more range? Does that mean wider or more telephoto? The lens you have now reaches out a bit but has very little wide angle.

The 50mm f/1.8 (which was suggested) is a great idea. It would give you wonderful low-light capability and would be a good portrait/candid lens.

It would be hard to get a zoom with any speed (large aperature) for $200. I would invest in the 50 1.8 now and save for a zoom that is more to your liking.

That's my 0.02.

If you want wider with zoom and a budget lens, Nikon makes an 18-135. That would be a GREAT range but, like most economy zooms, it's pretty slow. It's f/3.5-5.6, but it's only $400. Something to think about. You'd still need the 50 for speed.

That is so much more that I knew about. You all have been a great help! I will do some looking. I was on the wolf camera site and saw this http://www.wolfcamera.com/product/251664264.htm?bct=t13024003%3Bcidigital-cameras-and-accessories%3Bcilenses-for-digital-cameras%3Bcislr-lens%3Bcilenses-for-nikon

It boasts some of the things I want to do but I don't want to get rooked into a lens I don't really need that may not be good quality.

ziggy53

j photog wrote:

That is so much more that I knew about. You all have been a great help! I will do some looking. I was on the wolf camera site and saw this http://www.wolfcamera.com/product/251664264.htm?bct=t13024003%3Bcidigital-cameras-and-accessories%3Bcilenses-for-digital-cameras%3Bcislr-lens%3Bcilenses-for-nikon

It boasts some of the things I want to do but I don't want to get rooked into a lens I don't really need that may not be good quality.

I believe you would find that Quantaray lens a step down in image quality from the Nikon zoom you currently own. You might be better off acquiring an external electronic flash, which could allow a smaller aperture and/or shorter shutter speed, either of which will improve indoor images.

Couple a Sigma EF-500 DG Super NA i-TTL flash with a "Better Bounce Card" (and proper rechnique), and you should see a marked improvement in your photographs.

http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=47275

ziggy53

j photog

ziggy53 wrote:

I believe you would find that Quantaray lens a step down in image quality from the Nikon zoom you currently own. You might be better off acquiring an external electronic flash, which could allow a smaller aperture and/or shorter shutter speed, either of which will improve indoor images.

Couple a Sigma EF-500 DG Super NA i-TTL flash with a "Better Bounce Card" (and proper rechnique), and you should see a marked improvement in your photographs.

http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=47275

ziggy53

thanks for the tip, ziggy!

Scott_Quier

j photog wrote:

That is so much more that I knew about. You all have been a great help! I will do some looking. I was on the wolf camera site and saw this http://www.wolfcamera.com/product/251664264.htm?bct=t13024003%3Bcidigital-cameras-and-accessories%3Bcilenses-for-digital-cameras%3Bcislr-lens%3Bcilenses-for-nikon

It boasts some of the things I want to do but I don't want to get rooked into a lens I don't really need that may not be good quality.

J,

Before you spend money at an on-line store, it usually makes a lot of sense to investigate their reputation. One good source for this sort of information is http://www.resellerratings.com. They have a listing for wolfcamera here that you might find interesting reading. BTW, a rating of 4.5 is not too good! Comapre that with the rating for B&H Photo and Video (http://www.bhphotovideo.com) found here. FYI - B&H and Adorama are two of a short list of "Gold Standard" on-line retailers.

JESTER

Yes, listen to Scott. I have done business with BHPhoto for over 10 years and have NEVER had a problem with them. I think the owner built a house with what I have spent there. They have fair prices and ship fast. I have also dealt with Adorama and have never had problems with them either. I think Wolf and Ritz are a little high.

For the price you are willing to spend you aren't going to get much. You might try Ebay or see what is available used at your local camera shop. People are always trading up. BHPhoto also has a used dept.

A fast lens is great but sometimes expensive. I'd go with Ziggy's idea of a flash first and see if that helps.

ziggy53

Scott_Quier wrote:

J,

Before you spend money at an on-line store, it usually makes a lot of sense to investigate their reputation. One good source for this sort of information is http://www.resellerratings.com. They have a listing for wolfcamera here that you might find interesting reading. BTW, a rating of 4.5 is not too good! Comapre that with the rating for B&H Photo and Video (http://www.bhphotovideo.com) found here. FYI - B&H and Adorama are two of a short list of "Gold Standard" on-line retailers.

claudermilk

I would never buy anything from Wolf (or Ritz for that matter). They are simply overpriced & push junk like that Quantaray on uninformed people. B&H & Adorama are the best places to start.

As to what lens, I'd echo the 50mm/1.8 recommendation. Every manufacturer has one, they are all very reasonably priced and give you an excellent starting point. The 50mm used to be the "kit" lens in the film days. From there you can learn what your photo habits are & what lenses will suit your needs best.

One technicality that has not been explained & sound to me like you might be a bit confsed on is what a zoom lens actually is. All "zoom" means is a varying focal length lens, so your currnet 28-80 is a zoom lens. Any lens with two focal lengths listed is a zoom, so using my own lenses as examples: I have a 12-24 and a 24-70--both zooms but one is considered wide-angle and the other mid-range. Prime lenses, like the 50mm we are suggesting is a single focal length (1x zoom I sometims say just to confuse people ), so in this case you will always be at 50mm with this lens--to "zoom" these lenses, you walk closer or further from your subject (aka "foot zoom").

Scott_Quier

claudermilk wrote:

Prime lenses, like the 50mm we are suggesting is a single focal length (1x zoom I sometims say just to confuse people )

Nice. I'll have to remember that as I love messin' with peoples' heads!

j photog

You all have been so helpful. I really appreciate it as I am still a novice in the tech area. I'm starting to get some of this stuff!
I will say Im bummed to hear about Wolf Camera though...

TylerW

UT Scott wrote:

For $200 i'm not sure you'll find much better than the 50 1.8. But I'm not sure, there maybe the perfect lens for you somewhere

If you're looking for more variety in your shots, then a prime lens in your bag may be the best way to go. Because it doesn't zoom, you need to think a lot harder about how you want to put your subject into your frame, especially if you don't have the ability to get any closer or any far away from it, because you can't 'zoom with your feet' for whatever reason. You'll need to work harder with it, but a medium focal length prime can be a really powerful learning tool.

That and with a $200 budget, there's not much room for option. Fast zoom lenses of any recommendable quality get expensive FAST. You might save your pennies a while longer and spring for the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, which is a much wider angle lens, but f/1.8 of the 50mm prime will give you a good degree more flexibility in low light than an f/2.8.

j photog

TylerW wrote:

If you're looking for more variety in your shots, then a prime lens in your bag may be the best way to go. Because it doesn't zoom, you need to think a lot harder about how you want to put your subject into your frame, especially if you don't have the ability to get any closer or any far away from it, because you can't 'zoom with your feet' for whatever reason. You'll need to work harder with it, but a medium focal length prime can be a really powerful learning tool.

That and with a $200 budget, there's not much room for option. Fast zoom lenses of any recommendable quality get expensive FAST. You might save your pennies a while longer and spring for the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, which is a much wider angle lens, but f/1.8 of the 50mm prime will give you a good degree more flexibility in low light than an f/2.8.

This is really reassuring as I'm going to purchase this thing tomorrow. I have a few weddings coming up and a band that needs a gig shot. I think this lens sounds like a winner for now. Until I've got the big bucks...Yea. That will happen soon!

Matthew Saville

As a wedding / portrait / event photographer, I cannot imagine what I'd do in some situations without a fast apeture 50mm prime lens. Actually I know what I'd do, I'd put my camera away becuase it would be useless to shoot..

Personally I sprung for the 50mm f/1.4 lens, but that's only because I shoot in VERY BAD light, namely stage plays. The older versions in used but good condition can sometimes hit $200, but usually you can expect to pay $250+ for a 50mm f/1.4

A 50mm f/1.8 on the other hand can be found for $50 and up, in good condition. That makes the f/1.4 lens decidedly "overpriced" unless you truly need the extra apeture, and also it makes the f/1.8 lens an "essential" lens that everybody should own.

The best recommendation I can make is where to buy it, especially since you seem to be slightly let down upon realizing that some sellers out there will attempt to rip you off...

I use KEH.com for used gear, especially older lenses I'm looking to get at a bargain. There aren't any 50mm f/1.8 lenses in used condition on there right now, but just watch for a week or so and you should see some passing through at about $50-75. They go quickly though! KEH is one of THE biggest used camera dealers, and I just love their service. Completely legit and reliable!

Take care,
-Matt-

Red J

Consider finding yourself an 18-70mm. They can be had in like new condition on FM or ebay for a little more than 200.

Wider, faster. Nice lens at a reasonable price.

It is the first lens I got for my D80.

claudermilk

TylerW wrote:

If you're looking for more variety in your shots, then a prime lens in your bag may be the best way to go. Because it doesn't zoom, you need to think a lot harder about how you want to put your subject into your frame, especially if you don't have the ability to get any closer or any far away from it, because you can't 'zoom with your feet' for whatever reason. You'll need to work harder with it, but a medium focal length prime can be a really powerful learning tool.

That and with a $200 budget, there's not much room for option. Fast zoom lenses of any recommendable quality get expensive FAST. You might save your pennies a while longer and spring for the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, which is a much wider angle lens, but f/1.8 of the 50mm prime will give you a good degree more flexibility in low light than an f/2.8.

Good advice. I actually kept my 50/1.8 on my camera exclusively for the better part of a year. I learned a whole lot in that time since I really had to think about my composition--much of my shooting was stuck in a corner where I couldn't "foot zoom" any more than leaning forward or back would allow.

j photog

oh boy...
so now i own this 50 mm 1.8 we have been discussing. i'm really trying to work with it. first off everyone is a genuis. second....me? not so much!

i took some great photos tonight of the gig i was hired for, however, i found myself trying to see the real difference between the lens my nikon D50 came with and this new Nikkor 50 mm other than the whole non-zoom bit.

i'm sure my not really seeing the difference yet has to do with something i'm not discovering quite yet with it. again. i please people with my photos but i just know tricks from trial and error. however, this lens....hum.

hints?

ziggy53

j photog wrote:

so now i own this 50 mm 1.8 we have been discussing. i'm really trying to work with it. first off everyone is a genuis. second....me? not so much!

i took some great photos tonight of the gig i was hired for, however, i found myself trying to see the real difference between the lens my nikon D50 came with and this new Nikkor 50 mm other than the whole non-zoom bit.

i'm sure my not really seeing the difference yet has to do with something i'm not discovering quite yet with it. again. i please people with my photos but i just know tricks from trial and error. however, this lens....hum.

hints?

Advantages of the 50mm, f1.8:

More reliable focussing in low-light because of the larger aperture.
Faster shutter speeds at any given ISO if you use the larger aperture.
Better resolution by f4 than the kit zoom.
More compact, less intimidating.

My suggestion for the external flash still stands. You will see a more marked improvement with control over lighting than you will see from either lens or camera alone.

Control does imply an understanding of the techniques which allow control. Simply slapping an external flash on the camera and using it pointed straight ahead will probably not yield what you or your customers are looking for.

Review these threads for inspiration:
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=50725
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=49372
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=49711
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=47275
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=50649
http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=54558&postcount=6
http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=54562&postcount=10
http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=54566&postcount=14
http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=54569&postcount=17
http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=54575&postcount=23
http://www.shutterbug.com/techniques/lighting/
http://www.joedembphotography.com/flipit/portrait/
http://strobist.blogspot.com/2006/03/lighting-101-bouncing-off-of-walls-and.html

Best,

ziggy53

saurora

Best advice would be to post some of the photos you are questioning along with exif info so members can help you figure out what the problems are. It's a great little lens and perfect for shooting nightclubs and weddings. I think the advice given you was spot on, just give the members a chance to help you out some more..........and they will!!!

Harryb

Here's a few possibilities for your price range

The Nikon 28mm 2.8 for a little over $200

The Nikon 50mm 1.8 (my favorite of all of these)

The Nikon 28-105 3.5-4.5 for $200+, you should be able to find a used one for under $200

The Sigma 28-200 3.5-5.6 (also has a macro capability) for $249

The Tamron 17-35 2.8-4 for $289

all the prices are from B&H and you may be able to get lower prices.

j photog

ziggy53 wrote:

Advantages of the 50mm, f1.8:

More reliable focussing in low-light because of the larger aperture.
Faster shutter speeds at any given ISO if you use the larger aperture.
Better resolution by f4 than the kit zoom.
More compact, less intimidating.

My suggestion for the external flash still stands. You will see a more marked improvement with control over lighting than you will see from either lens or camera alone.

Control does imply an understanding of the techniques which allow control. Simply slapping an external flash on the camera and using it pointed straight ahead will probably not yield what you or your customers are looking for.

Review these threads for inspiration:
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=50725
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=49372
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=49711
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=47275
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=50649
http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=54558&postcount=6
http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=54562&postcount=10
http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=54566&postcount=14
http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=54569&postcount=17
http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=54575&postcount=23
http://www.shutterbug.com/techniques/lighting/
http://www.joedembphotography.com/flipit/portrait/
http://strobist.blogspot.com/2006/03/lighting-101-bouncing-off-of-walls-and.html

Best,

ziggy53

you are so wise....

j photog

To Ziggy:My misconception
I had the silly idea all flashes are about the same. I got excited finding my old childhood flash that my father bought for a camera I had in college. It was of course film. It is a Quantaray QB-350A? Is that even a real piece of merch? Anywho, that is what I have been using to save money. Sad, huh?

ziggy53

j photog wrote:

I had the silly idea all flashes are about the same. I got excited finding my old childhood flash that my father bought for a camera I had in college. It was of course film. It is a Quantaray QB-350A? Is that even a real piece of merch? Anywho, that is what I have been using to save money. Sad, huh?

I do not recommend using that flash directly on a digital camera. The trigger voltage appears to be too high to be safe:

http://www.botzilla.com/photo/strobeVolts.html

You would do well to verify this for yourself, but until you do, don't use the flash except as a remote slave.

Sorry.

Other than that (but that is potentially a big problem) the flash "is" more powerful than the built-in flash on your camera, and it has a tilt capability, so it could be used as bounce, with a bounce card and with a diffusion hood.

ziggy53