Recommendations for lenses for Nikon DSLR

[Copprhed]

As some of you know, I recently invested in a Nikon D3200 DSLR camera. It came with the typical mid to low range 18-55 and 55- 200 lenses. They are adequate, but definitely not stellar. Please some of you out there who are knowledgeable, recommend some good, REASONABLY priced lenses that would help improve my photography while not totally emptying my wallet. I would greatly appreciate it.

[Copprhed]

Aww, come on...Silver? NikonGuy? I know you guys didn't start by buying the most expensive stuff. A poor amateur needs some advice......

[saggs]

I've been a photographer for ~25years.  Here are my thoughts, hope they help.



I feel your question is to vague to give any definitive recommendation.

What type of photography do you do most?  Landscapes, Portraits, Wildlife, Birding, Macro or just general snapshots.

What is it about your current lenses that you are unhappy with?  Focal length, max aperture, bokeh, vignetting, AF speed, sharpness, distortion, colors, build quality, etc...

You also have to be willing to critique yourself. When you look at a shot you're unhappy with, is it really your gear to blame, or something you did wrong?  eg. 'Is the sharpness of that lens really that bad, or did I introduce motion blur with poor technique?'

If you don't know enough to answer those questions, then I'd stick with the kit lenses for a while until your skills increase.  For most beginners it is their own skills that hold them back and not any gear.  Eventually as your skills grow you will reach a point where you realize. "I don't like this lens because of 'X'. "  or "I want a lens with better 'Y' " or "I'm missing shots because of 'Z'. "

At that point you can go someplace like www.slrgear.com  www.dxomark.com or www.dpreview.com and read a bunch of specs and reviews to see what suits your needs and budget.  Just remember top quality optics are NOT cheap, expect to pay at least 3x-4x the money for a decent step up from the kit lenses, and the top of the line glass will be 3x more again.

[Copprhed]

Thanks for answering Saggs, I'm interested in doing moon shots, candids around town of buildings, birds, etc. I've posted a few in the Unofficial Pictures thread in the Oclub. I've got the basic lenses that came with the D3200 kit, and I'd like to upgrade to some better quality lenses. I've looked at some of the Sigma lenses, and their mid rad(quality) lenses look pretty good for the price. Also like Macro, btw, and have some lens extenders that work really well for it, so I'm no necessarily looking for specific macro lenses right now. Reading all I can in photo mags, and picking up some pointers.

[saggs]

I think your on the right track looking at Sigma, also Tamron makes some good lenses.  I've had mixed luck with both.

The thing I've found with the third party lenses, (Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, etc..) is that their quality control can sometimes be hit or miss.  Meaning sometimes you can get a fantastic lens, and others with the same model might be a real turd.  If you do get one, be sure to plant it on a real solid tripod, using a remote and mirror lock-up (if you have it) and test it out on some still life scene with good lighting, and if it's a turd optically don't be afraid to return/exchange it because the next one of the same model might be much better.

As for moon shots, a decent 70-300mm'ish 5.6 lens @300mm will do the trick (also handy for birds if you get close enough), it's bright enough that with a good tripod you don't need a fast 2.8 lens.  Metering for moon shots can be tricky so I ignore the in-camera meter and follow the "Loony f/11 rule" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Looney_11_rule adjusted for whatever aperture is sharpest with a particular lens.

As for a general walk-about lens. I primarily shoot FF sensor, but I do have an APS-C body as well, I've used a Tamron 17-70mm 2.8 on it.  While it can't compare with the Zeiss 24-70mm 2.8 on my FF, it's good enough for most stuff.  It's also 1/6th the price.

Just remember that in today's digital world, while you may be updating cameras every few years to take advantage of better sensor tech, a decent lens will still last you a lifetime.  I have lenses with my Pentax 6x7 system that are much older then I am, and are awesome.

[Copprhed]

Thanks! I have a decent tripod, and have a laptop that I use with DigiCamera Control to operate the camera remotely(by usb cable) and have gotten some ok shots. Forgot to say that I got an Opteka 420-800 HD Telephoto zoom( cheap lens, but it does ok on a tripod). It's f8 at 420 and f16 at 800. On the tripod, using the remote trigger I got a great shot of the moon, and it really helped that the program automatically locks the mirror up, so there's less vibration. I'd love to be able to afford a 55-200 VR with a REALLY low aperture setting but 1100 to 1200 bucks is out of my range, especially since I probably won't ever go pro. I would like to get a FF body one day though. Back in the day, I had an Olympus OM1-N and did a good amount of black and white, even took a course and learned to develop and print my own stuff. That was 30 years ago. I will be doing some B&W cause I think it has great character.

[saggs]

Thanks! I have a decent tripod, and have a laptop that I use with DigiCamera Control to operate the camera remotely(by usb cable) and have gotten some ok shots. Forgot to say that I got an Opteka 420-800 HD Telephoto zoom( cheap lens, but it does ok on a tripod). It's f8 at 420 and f16 at 800. On the tripod, using the remote trigger I got a great shot of the moon, and it really helped that the program automatically locks the mirror up, so there's less vibration. I'd love to be able to afford a 55-200 VR with a REALLY low aperture setting but 1100 to 1200 bucks is out of my range, especially since I probably won't ever go pro. I would like to get a FF body one day though. Back in the day, I had an Olympus OM1-N and did a good amount of black and white, even took a course and learned to develop and print my own stuff. That was 30 years ago. I will be doing some B&W cause I think it has great character.

Cool.

Sounds like you have a lot more experience then I guessed from reading your first post.  If you want to get real techy on lens reviews then DXOmark is the place.

Ironically, I shoot Sony/Minolta, have since I first got into photography in the early 90's.  But lately I have been seriously considering a switch to Nikon.  Sony for the last few years has done a real good job at pissing off the longtime Minolta A-mount users they got when they bought the mount from Minolta.  I currently shoot a Sony A900, fantastic camera but going on 7 years old.  And every A-mount camera Sony has built since the A900 I hate, and now they have pretty much abandoned A-mount users for the more lucrative mirrorless market.

What really gets me is that IMO Sony builds the best sensors.  In fact Nikon (and now the new Pentax FF too) buys many of its sensors from Sony.  The sensor in your 3200 is probably Sony, the whole 800/810 series use a Sony sensor, it is a Sony sensor I'd really, really like to get my hands on.  But while Nikon has had it for over 2 years in the D800, Sony still has not put it into one of their own A-mount bodies so I can use it.  That and they've gone to all electronic viewfinders which I dislike.  Basically today, if you want the latest, greatest Sony sensor in a Pro level camera, you have to buy a Nikon or Pentax. 

If it weren't for the heavy financial loss I'd take because of all the Sony and Minolta lenses I own, I would have switched to a Nikon D800 or 810 already.  As it is, i just cannot afford to switch.

[Copprhed]

Understand perfectly. Professional level stuff is getting prohibitively expensive, for sure. I've seen lenses online for up to $17000, which really made my jaw drop. For now a higher quality 55-200 or 300 in the $400 dollar range is something I can do, and it should hold me for a while. I manage and maintain an apartment community here in Augusta,GA, and can get shots of hawks and hummingbirds here on property, and all within a 45 minute drive can get to places where waterfowl are abundant. I think that will interest me a lot, along with B&W, portraiture of folks with interesting faces which abound. Thanks again for the suggestions and keep an eye out, I'll be posting shots from time to time, and will want honest critique.

[SilverZ06]

Hey Copper,
Sorry I just saw this thread, I've been out of town working in Savannah the last couple days. Anyways, if you truly feel you will switch to full frame in the future then I would look at getting full frame glass now. It will work on your d3200. Look at craigslist in the photography section and you can find a steal on a nice lens or even camera. For what you are looking for now I would recommend finding a used 70-300 vr lens. They are around $500 new so I'm sure you can find one in the 350-400 range with a little searching. I have used craigslist a lot as I upgraded my gear through the years. I am far from a pro and just a hobbyist but I bought a lot of my new gear with money from selling my old gear (and a tax return.) One thing I wish I did is start with the expensive stuff instead of slowly upgrading. I would have saved a lot of time and money over my gradual upgrading. Granted the initial hit is painful but I still took that hit except I also had the expense of the other 3 camera bodies before my current D810. One thing I did do (and recommend you so as well) is rent lenses I was interested in. I use Lensrentals.com and tried out a lot of different lenses. If I really liked a lens I would start saving to buy myself a copy. You can do the same for the 70-300. Those are very cheap rentals and you can rent the top of the line pro glass just to try. While I was on a tight budget I sold my kit 55-200 and just rented a telephoto when I wanted to shoot an event like an airshow. You really just need to decide what you shoot the most and grab a lens for that situation first. I think the nikon 70-300mm Vr will fit the bill for you nicely. 

[Obie303]

Copprhed,

I still shoot with an old Nikon D80 but my upgrade is coming next month.  I was having the same problem when I first started getting serious about my photography.  Most of my shots are outdoors.  I like landscape shots, wildlife, and floral.  I've barely dabbled in the lunar photography and I'm still making mistakes. 

These are the lenses I have in my camera bag.

Nikon 50mm 1/8
Nikon 18-55mm (came with the camera 8 years ago)
Nikon 18-105mm (this is my walk-around lens)
Nikon 70-300mm (my telephoto lens)

Most of my wildlife shots in a zoo or around the house, I still use my 18-105mm.  My landscape and floral shots, I like my 50mm.  If I want really close up shots of the floral, I use some Hoya magnification filters.  My 18-55mm lens hasn't been used in a few years. 

My current challenge is a hummingbird shot with the 70-300mm.  So, to answer your question, this lens would be a great start for you.  Not too expensive and will give you the reach you might be looking for.

I use this website for pointers;

http://www.digitalcameraworld.com/

For lens reviews and comparisons, I would recommend dpreview.com

Good luck,
Obie

[Ripsnort]

Been shooting and developing my own since 1976 and have had a side business in professional fotograffy since 2006....now that my pedigree is posted, here is a great website for analyzing Nikon lenses.
This guy is good. And no..its not Ken "I'm an idiot" Rockwell....

http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html

Edit: there is no such sentence as "Reasonable" price and "Good" lens in the digital world. Either buy low and be slightly disappointed or save up and buy big.
In this particular part of the free enterprise system, you literally "Get what you pay for".

[Chalenge]

The extra lenses I bought are all f/2.8 to reduce the digital noise levels that the smaller sensor produces. This makes sense even in full size sensors when you are taking moon shots.  I do star trails and night sky time-lapse shoots with a fisheye lens on a Sony 3/4 and full size.

I recommend buy your lenses as the need arises, or you may buy something that occupies the bag more than the mount.

[saggs]

For lens reviews and comparisons, I would recommend dpreview.com

Just stay off of the dpreview forums.  If all the idiots there spend as much time actually doing photography as they did arguing about whose gear is .004% better, and pixel peeping at images blown up to 500% just to find fault with everything...  well then they'd all be the next Ansel Adams or Art Wolfe.

Personally, for techy specs and reviews I prefer dxomark.com, as it's all very, very technical with no bias, and for general handling/use/real world reviews I like Luminous Landscape which also has lots of good non-techy articles on becoming a better photographer.  Also if you're into wildlife photography like me, then check out Moose Peterson's website and BT Journal publications.  BT stands for Biology and Technology, as he covers both the animal biology aspect that's important to finding and getting close enough to photograph wildlife, as well as the Technology like sensors, lenses etc...

[Copprhed]

A wealth of information! Thanks everyone!

[Copprhed]

These are two I took with my 18-55 with a 12mm extender