My next lens

eheldreth · Sep 13, 2004

I just finished a week with around $450.00 in over time. And I want to buy a new lens. I have a Nikon N80 and currently only have two lenses a 28-80 and a 70-300. I would like your suggestions on what a next good lens would be(Well as good as it gets for $450).

Just some background on what and why I shoot. I love to backpack, and thats the reason I bought my first camera. So I enjoy landscapes, and wildlife. I have reacently been considering doing some macro photography however. I am realy torn between a macro lens and a wide angle lens. I shoot mostly B&W(Ilford delta 100/400) and do my own developing and printing.

Thanks for your advise and this great site.

rogueish · Sep 13, 2004

eheldreth said:
I have a Nikon N80 and currently only have two lenses a 28-80 and a 70-300.
So I enjoy landscapes, and wildlife. I have reacently been considering doing some macro photography however. I am realy torn between a macro lens and a wide angle lens. I shoot mostly B&W(Ilford delta 100/400) and do my own developing and printing.

Thanks for your advise and this great site.

Tamron received Lens of the year award last year for a 70-300 Macro lens.
Since you already have a 70 -300, maybe pick up the Macro filters (x1 x2 x3) I believe they may come as a set. Then you can spend your money on a bigger lens (a 500 or larger perhaps )

titrisol · Sep 13, 2004

Depending on what you want to shoot you have a few alternaives:

If you like macro photogrpahy I'd reccomend a 105-micro nikkor o a tamron 90mm 1:1

Wide angle: a 20mm Nikkor or a 28mm Nikkor are great

sparx · Sep 13, 2004

For wildlife shots perhaps a longer zoom or a prime lens of about 600mm, if you can find one for your budget. Or for the landscapes how about a good quality prime 28mm. It will almost definitely be faster than your zoom, will be lighter as well.
Or how about a lightweight tripod?

eheldreth · Sep 13, 2004

Thanks for the suggestions. I think I have narrowed it down to the following three choices.

62mm Close-up Kit (+1, +2, +4) for my 70-300
Nikon Normal AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Autofocus Lens(Fast lens plus its a prime)
with either
Nikon Wide Angle AF Nikkor 28mm f/2.8D Autofocus Lens
or
Nikon Wide Angle AF Nikkor 24mm f/2.8D Autofocus Lens

or I could blow the budget on one lens
Nikon Super Wide Angle AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D Autofocus Lens

titrisol · Sep 13, 2004

eheldreth said:
Thanks for the suggestions. I think I have narrowed it down to the following three choices.

62mm Close-up Kit (+1, +2, +4) for my 70-300
Nikon Normal AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Autofocus Lens(Fast lens plus its a prime)

Can you get the 50mm/1.4?

eheldreth said:
with either
Nikon Wide Angle AF Nikkor 28mm f/2.8D Autofocus Lens
or
Nikon Wide Angle AF Nikkor 24mm f/2.8D Autofocus Lens

or I could blow the budget on one lens
Nikon Super Wide Angle AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D Autofocus Lens

joeyk49 · Sep 13, 2004

I, similarly, had a 35-80 and an 80-210 zoom for my minolta. I opted for the wide angle because the zooms were sometimes excluding things yhat I wanted in my shots.

The WA's let you get nice and close for details without excluding alot form the shot. You pay for it with distortion, but what the heck, there's a price for everything.

joeyk49 · Sep 13, 2004

But I also just picked up a 500mm reflector....just cause.

roteague · Sep 13, 2004

While I do primarily LF these days, I also have an N80. If you are going to do a lot of backpacking and hiking, I would suggest something more along the lines of an ultra-wide angle lens or zoom. I have a Sigma 17-35 which I have found to be a great lens (I use it for > 90% of 35mm stuff). The lens is very sharp. You just need to be careful of the large filter size - 82mm.

eheldreth · Sep 13, 2004

titrisol said:
Can you get the 50mm/1.4?

I have never used anything lower than a 1.8 and I'm curious, how much of a diffrence is there between 1.8 and 1.4.

KeesDeBruin · Sep 15, 2004

roteague said:
While I do primarily LF these days, I also have an N80. If you are going to do a lot of backpacking and hiking, I would suggest something more along the lines of an ultra-wide angle lens or zoom. I have a Sigma 17-35 which I have found to be a great lens (I use it for > 90% of 35mm stuff). The lens is very sharp. You just need to be careful of the large filter size - 82mm.

The new EX HSM version of this lens uses a 77mm filter size. I've used it on my trip to Africa and I'm very pleased with the results with a F75 and standard ISO200 Fuji Superia film.

FrankB · Sep 15, 2004

eheldreth said:
I have never used anything lower than a 1.8 and I'm curious, how much of a diffrence is there between 1.8 and 1.4.

Less than a stop and, in my opinion, nowhere near enough to justify the price difference. Also, some lens tests have put the f1.8 as sharper than the f1.4 (although you'd need keen eyes to spot it).

I agonised over the same thing a couple of years ago, went with f1.8 and it hasn't disappointed me. Maybe consider putting the surplus into a set of extension tubes for close-up work (no additional glass to interfere with your existing optics, there's a 3rd-party manufacturer that does them with AF so your N80 will still TTL meter through them) or look at chopping in the 28-80 for a 28-105 (better optics, useful range and a semi-macro facility).

You might also want to ask around here http://www.nikonians.org

eheldreth · Sep 15, 2004

FrankB said:
Less than a stop and, in my opinion, nowhere near enough to justify the price difference. Also, some lens tests have put the f1.8 as sharper than the f1.4 (although you'd need keen eyes to spot it).

I agonised over the same thing a couple of years ago, went with f1.8 and it hasn't disappointed me. Maybe consider putting the surplus into a set of extension tubes for close-up work (no additional glass to interfere with your existing optics, there's a 3rd-party manufacturer that does them with AF so your N80 will still TTL meter through them) or look at chopping in the 28-80 for a 28-105 (better optics, useful range and a semi-macro facility).

You might also want to ask around here http://www.nikonians.org

Thanks FrankB
I think I'll go with the 24mm, I like the idea of having something a little wider than my 28-80 and a couple primes.

As for the extension tubes. I have looked at them(I believe they where from kenko and they did support AF) but wondered if the added weight could harm the camera.

mark · Sep 15, 2004

You will not be disappointed with your 24mm. I really liked mine until murphy had his way with it. You should have some money left over for film too. The weight of the extension tubes will not be a bother since you will not have them on all the time. When you buy them make sure they mount and work on the camera. In other words buy from a reputable source. I still have a set that are not for nikon mount no matter what the A***oles at cambridge camera said after I sent them back to them for the third time, even the box said Pentax.

My next lens

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency