Best Starter Lens?

[Archie]

I'm planning to get a new Nikon DSLR and was wondering what is the best first lens I should get with it?

[toffee bread]

People talk about 'all rounder lenses', such as the 18-200mm. The Nikon 18-200 is really good.



This was shot on a Nikon D60 with a 18-200mm F3.5-5.6 VR ED. I think in good light, such lenses will perform very well. This lens will cost more than S$1k though.

Do consider lenses with shorter range such as the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8. Besides getting a constant bright aperture of 2.8 throughout the zoom range, the amount of distortion could be significantly less.

Do rent/borrow lenses of diferent ranges and try them on a photoshoot yourself and decide!

[Juggernaut]

I recommend an 18-200 as the first lens. If got $$, get the Nikon version; else get the Tamron also works.

[toffee bread]

A Nikon 18-200 will cost ~$1100 new. Only the AF-S and ED might come in a bit useful.

I"d rather suggest a kit 18-55, sigma 30mm F1.4 and nikon 85mm F1.8 will which slightly exceed the budget but one gets to learn more about zoom / fixed and fast (big aperture) lenses.

[kklee]

I'm planning to get a new Nikon DSLR and was wondering what is the best first lens I should get with it?

Depends on kind of photos you want to take e.g. landscape, portraits, etc.

[toffee bread]

I think most newbies doesn't really know what they want to shoot yet...thus a 'all rounder' lens or some good combo might be suitable

[kklee]

Which is why must set them to start thinking. Kit lens usually will suffice to start with until limitation is reached.

[Poseidon]

Yeah, newbies usually don't have any specialisation yet; hence I second the recommendation of the "all rounder" 18-200 lens; it will allow the newbie more time to grow and specialise in rather than the kit lens alone. best is to drop the kit lens and go straight to 18-200 to avoid duplication.

[LGB]

Hmmm I am still a newbie, but just to add my two cents worth. I personally feel that the 18-200mm lens will make the photographer "lazy", for example when an object he wants to take is too far, zooming might seem to be the only option. However, the picture will look very flat. Whereas if he gets a lens which is 18-50mm (considering the crop factor which will make it 24-70mm), this will "force" the photographer to either walk closer to the subject/object which he wishes to snap or think more creatively how to compose his pictures, rather than just using the zoom function. Furthermore, as toffee has mentioned, these lenses with have an aperture of f2.8 throughout will also allow the photographer to snap in different low light situations. Another way to shoot in low light is of course to use a prime lens which has an aperture of f1.8 or lower.(of course this kind of lenses cost a lot, but once you get it, I dun think that you will ever regret forking out the cash for it.) Furthermore the extra sharpness of using a prime lens is an added bonus.

[bukitimah]

People talk about 'all rounder lenses', such as the 18-200mm. The Nikon 18-200 is really good.




This was shot on a Nikon D60 with a 18-200mm F3.5-5.6 VR ED. I think in good light, such lenses will perform very well. This lens will cost more than S$1k though.

Do consider lenses with shorter range such as the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8. Besides getting a constant bright aperture of 2.8 throughout the zoom range, the amount of distortion could be significantly less.

Do rent/borrow lenses of diferent ranges and try them on a photoshoot yourself and decide!

Mine is 18-105, what is the difference? What is the letter ED and Dx mean and what should we look out for when using such lens?

[Poseidon]

18-200 has longer reach. ED means extra dispersion I think; some designation on what type of glass is used. DX is for 1.5x sensor bodies; which is every Nikon DSLR except the D3 series and D700.

Mine is 18-105, what is the difference? What is the letter ED and Dx mean and what should we look out for when using such lens?