Glass Dream Team

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by Wilross3, Sep 30, 2008.

  1. Hello all... so many awesome lenses out there. I'd appreciate some input to help me focus (pun intended) on building my collection.

    I am a (newly) serious hobbyist... and fairly new to DSLR, shooting mostly P&S digital for the last 10 years, and film prior to that. But the bug has bitten me badly now... lol. Used a D40 before I stepped up to the D90, but no quality glass with that.

    I travel a lot with my kids, and we do get to some cool places. I also love to shoot sports, both the kids school stuff and collegiate. Soccer, football, hoping to do some basketball this fall. So I need a good general group of lenses.

    I want quality glass, don't want any regrets for "not getting the 1.4 instead." I like Nikon lenses, and would like to maintain some consistency here. Is this silly?

    I am willing to spend some money, but the budget is not unlimited! We're talking long term here.

    Here's what I'm thinking... already own 70-200 2.8 VR and the 18-105 that came with the D90. Would consider selling the 18-105, and adding the following...

    85mm f1.4 for a general walk around lens, kids photos, indoor gymnastics, award ceremonies, etc. would the 50 mm 1.4 be better?

    300mm f/2.8 VR for sports, good nature shots, whenever I want a fast lens with great range. Add a 1.4x teleconverter.

    Macro/close up lens for fun. Suggestions?

    So what say Ye? Am I on the right track? Am I missing something? Does B&H have a points/rewards program?

    TIA!

    Bill
     
  2. rotxlk82

    rotxlk82

    Jul 20, 2007
    UK
    For my tastes the 85/1.4 (allthough great glass) would be too long for walkaround, the 50 may be ok however I'd take something wider still for a 'do anyting' prime.
     
  3. i used the Sigma 30mm f1.4 ALOT when i had d200 and was great as a general walkaround lens. the 85 is great but not so much when space is restricted.
     
  4. Zorac

    Zorac

    300
    Dec 22, 2007
    Calgary, Canada
    the sigma 30/1.4 is more of a walk around prime on a dx sensor, nice lens too! i too generally go for the nikons, but this one is the exception to the rule.. :p
     
  5. bigshot

    bigshot

    662
    Aug 17, 2008
    Hollywood, USA
    The kit lenses you have cover a broad range and are capable of taking great images. Don't think of replacing them, think of supplementing them. I wouldn't sell either of your kit lenses. They're lightweight and versatile for walkaround use. No prime will replace their flexibility. If you want to get another lens, supplement a range you don't have... an ultrawide like one of the 12-24s or the Tokina 11-16. Or get a specialty prime lens like a fast portrait lens in the 85mm to 150mm range, or a fast sports tele around 300mm. Which one you get depends on whether you shoot more landscapes/architecture/interiors or portraits or sports.

    See ya
    Steve
     
  6. For walk-around lens(DX)......17-55 f2.8. The rest I agree with.
     
  7. Great advice - that's what I'm looking for! Thanks!

    Bill
     
  8. ERAUGrad04

    ERAUGrad04

    271
    Jan 15, 2008
    IL
    I have been putting together my lens collection and this is what I have so far:

    Nikkor 17-55 f2.8- Great all around lens. Spends 80% of my shooting time on the camera. Sharp and fast. Great build quality. Balances perfectly on the D90 in my opinion.

    Nikkor 50mm 1.4 - Sharp and 2 full stops faster than my 17-55. I love shooting this lens for single portraits at f/2.2. This lens is great wide open, but offers amazing sharpness and bokeh when stopped down just a bit. I find this lens to be perfect for times where the 17-55+mongo size hood is just a bit to obvious and obtrusive. This lens when paired with the great high ISO capabilites of the D90 is just shy of an unstoppable combination.

    Nikkor 70-300VR 3.5-5.6- Of course I would love a 300 2.8 or even just the 300 4, but I have to realistic. $3-5K for one lens for my hobby and part time business is just out of the question. I have shot some amazing images with the 70-300VR, and it only cost me $479! And if I have to, I can always crank the ISO up without any worries.

    I am with you on the all Nikon line up. I like the build and feel of Nikon over 3rd party lenses. Yes, I know I pay more for it, but thats just me.

    Hope this helps!
    Morgan
     
  9. Your selection would be nice and as said, the 17-55 would be perfect to add to it plus maybe a 12-24 or equivalent wide lens...
    But I would keep the 18-105vr for those times you might need a light weight lens with good FL. From what I've seen and used this lens, it's not too bad for those times...

    Getting the good gear is a no brainer, but there will be times when the 18-105 will come in handy, and realistically how much will you get for it compared to the $$$ you are planning to spend on the glass you mentioned… JMHO…
     
  10. I would agree that the 17-55 is a great walk around lens... You've got the 70-200 already. Add a 50 1.4 and 85 1.4, along with a 60mm micro (either AF-S or non AF-S version is fine). Get rid of the 18-105, but only if you pick up a wide alternative.

    If you want to go all out - here would be my dream team:

    For general photography needs - can't go wrong with this group!!
    14-24
    24-70
    70-200

    Sports photography - one or more of the following:
    200 f/2
    300 vr
    400 vr
    and either a 1.4 or 1.7 tc...

    Either one of these 3/w a tc will do just about anything you ask...
    Hope this helps.
     
  11. Alan.Tran

    Alan.Tran

    75
    Jun 5, 2008
    California
    Big fan of the 17-55 2.8 on the DX format.

    The 85 1.4 is nice but I think it's a little long for most things. I have the 50 1.4 and love it.

    For macro work, I think the 105 2.8 is the most popular.
     
  12. Everybody's got an opinion. Me, too.

    First of all, I'd keep the 18-105. It's a snappy little walk around lens. Good range, light weight, and it even has VR!

    You already have Nikon's premiere tele-zoom. The 70-200 is legendary glass, and it's particularly great for candids. I'd complement it with...

    35/2 & 85/1.4: This pair of low light beauties can produce pro quality renderings of everything from scapes to people pics to indoor sports. The 85/1.4 is one of Nikon's finest portrait lens.

    Now you're into heavy hitter territory. It's an amazing lens, but you might want to try a 1.4x teleconverter on your 70-200 and see how much further you need to go before you mortgage the ranch.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 1, 2008
  13. BigBlkYJ

    BigBlkYJ

    77
    Sep 5, 2008
    Michigan
    What are the thoughts on the Tamron 18-50 f/2.8? Any different than the Nikkor lens (other than 5mm more?)
     
  14. Thanks all for the opinions... seems the consensus is to keep the 18-105. The reasoning seems solid, so I'm liking that choice more.

    Now I just need the powerball numbers...

    Thx all!

    Bill