Which Nikon lenses should I get first?

[James-EG]

I know it might be a bit of an odd question, at the moment I have no lenses for my new FM2n but hope to buy a 28mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4, 105mm f/2.5 and 180mm f/2.8 all AIS. Then maybe also a 35mm f/2 and 85mm f/2 if I feel they would be useful but the first four lenses are the priorities. I have found every lens on eBay but being 17 with only a saturday job puts a few limits on my money situation and after buying the camera I can only afford two of the lenses before I go on holiday in August. I'm quite sure the 50mm is one I can't really be without after all it is a standard lens, but then I'm stuck between the 28mm and 105mm, then there's an auction for a 180mm lens ending sooner than the 28mm and 105mm and I rarely see those for sale.

Overall I would just like to know which two of the four lenses you think I would be using the most, I would like to be taking photos of my family and the general scenery so I probably need an all round lens (50mm?) but I would also like to try and take other images that make me feel like I would need a lens with longer reach (105mm?). I have a Pentax K1000 with a 28mm lens so maybe I should just use that for any landscapes or seascapes?

I know I'm the only person who can really decide this but I would like the opinions of people who use these lenses, thanks,

 

[Dave Swinnard]

...I know I'm the only person who can really decide this but I would like the opinions of people who use these lenses, thanks,

FWIW when I shot a lot with my 35mm (Nikons of various sorts - lastly an F3) I used the following lenses the most -in order, most to least- 28 PC (f/4), 35, 105, 85. I had both a 50 f/2.4 and a 55 f/3.5 micro that seldom saw the light of day. As you say, you're the one best able to define what you like. Each of the lenses I used aligned with the subjects I was drawn to shoot.

Enjoy your FM2n, I had an FE that was supposedly my wife's camera back in the day as she thought the old F with the FTn head was too big and heavy but when my brother left my F on an arctic island one summer, the FE proved to be a wonderful camera until it was stolen.

 

[ruby.monkey]

In your position I would (indeed, did) start with just a 50mm f1.8 AIS (perhaps even the E version) and see how things go. You'll soon see which end of the focal range you're getting stuck on most.

Hell, if you need to save some pennies then I've got a 50mm f/2 Nikkor-H gathering dust, to which you'd be most welcome. The focus is a little dry and it's no beauty queen, but the glass is clean, the aperture is snappy, and it's been (dremel)AI'd by a previous owner.

 

[RattyMouse]

I know it might be a bit of an odd question, at the moment I have no lenses for my new FM2n but hope to buy a 28mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4, 105mm f/2.5 and 180mm f/2.8 all AIS. Then maybe also a 35mm f/2 and 85mm f/2 if I feel they would be useful but the first four lenses are the priorities. I have found every lens on eBay but being 17 with only a saturday job puts a few limits on my money situation and after buying the camera I can only afford two of the lenses before I go on holiday in August. I'm quite sure the 50mm is one I can't really be without after all it is a standard lens, but then I'm stuck between the 28mm and 105mm, then there's an auction for a 180mm lens ending sooner than the 28mm and 105mm and I rarely see those for sale.

Overall I would just like to know which two of the four lenses you think I would be using the most, I would like to be taking photos of my family and the general scenery so I probably need an all round lens (50mm?) but I would also like to try and take other images that make me feel like I would need a lens with longer reach (105mm?). I have a Pentax K1000 with a 28mm lens so maybe I should just use that for any landscapes or seascapes?

I know I'm the only person who can really decide this but I would like the opinions of people who use these lenses, thanks,

I shoot with a Nikon FM2n too. Yesterday I just bought a new lens in fact, a 20mm f/2.8 AIS.

For sure you should get a 50mm lens. I have the 50mm f/1.2 AIS lens but now wish I had either the f/1.4 or f/1.8 version simply due to weight. The f/1.2 variant is quite heavy and to be honest, f/1.2 is not all it is cracked up to be. So start off with a nice, cheap f/1.8.

I have the 24mm f/2 which is my standard city walk around lens when I want something wider. I have seen many shots with the 28mm f/2.8 that are staggeringly sharp so that would be something to consider. I also have the 85mm f/2 AIS which is fantastically small, light, and sharp.

For more reach, the 105mm f/2.5 is wonderful and not expensive and if you want even more, any of the 135mm's are also very highly rated.

Good luck!

 

[MattKing]

I'll tell you what my standard carry around kit is - just to show you that there will be different answers from different people. You may want to note that my kit isn't Nikon, it is Olympus OM.

My "standard" lens is a 35mm f/2. The field of view suits my view of the world quite well.

I carry a 24mm f/2.8 for when I need wide. I like the fact that this focal length gives a fairly wide field of view, even on the short dimension.

I also carry an 85mm f/2. It is long enough to give me some compression of distance, while still being short enough to be usable in interiors. It can be used with really tight portraits, although it is best with head and shoulders portraits (or farther).

A good 50mm is a great lens, if you are limiting yourself to just one lens.

 

[James-EG]

Thanks for the quick replies, much appreciated! Since it's already been recommended it I think I'll go with a 50mm f/1.8 instead of the 1.4 first of all and it doesn't seem to be considered any "worse" optically than the 1.4 and of course it's cheaper, thinking about it I probably won't even be using f/1.4 on a lens especially in daylight! Dave, I'm not sure how much landscape photography I'll have time for during the holiday so maybe the 28mm can wait for a bit, if I do need something for landscape I will have my K1000 and EOS 60D so that should be okay. Although I'll still see what I can do to get a 28mm f/2.8, I might get lucky and find a decent one going cheap. And I'm sorry to hear about your cameras, such a shame!

ruby.monkey thanks for the help and that is a very kind offer! Although I've learned a bit about AIS lenses so I think it would be easier for me to stick with them, I'd prefer to use later ones too.

RattyMouse thanks for the help. I'm still undecided between the 85mm and 105mm but I guess I'll just get whichever is cheaper at the time, there's one on eBay now but it's "like new" in the box so I'm guessing it'll reach a high price! Just out of interest, how much would you consider to be a fair price for the 50mm f/1.8? I found a couple for £80-90 ($135-150), does that seem fair to you?

Matt, thanks for your reply, unfortunately the Nikon 35mm f/2 seems to be few and far between, and so quite expensive for me, although the four lenses (or three excluding the 180mm) I mentioned before seem to me like they should provide a decent range for now, after using those for a bit I can then decide if I need anything else in between like an 85mm or 35mm. Unfortunately it's very hard to decide when I've almost never used prime lenses before!

Thanks again for all the great help!

 

[Alex Muir]

You should look at the 50mm f1.8 autofocus lens. It works well on manual cameras. A new one could be had for about 110 UKP recently, and good used examples crop up on eBay regularly. You would definitely get a good one for 80-90 UKP. If you are interested, look for the AF-D versions. Earlier AF models had a poor design of focus ring. If you're looking at them on eBay, the 'D' designation follows the maximum aperture value printed on the lens barrel. People sometimes list them as AF-D, when they are actually the older version. I have to say that, for versatility, I would opt for a mid-range zoom to take on holiday. You could get a Nikon 28-105 AF-D for the same money as the 50mm. Again, it works well manually, although there are also several AiS zooms in the mid range that are very cheap at the moment.
Alex

 

[James-EG]

Thanks Alex, I had considered a zoom although I decided against it, I just feel that using prime lenses will give me better results and will make shooting easier, I have a 400mm on my EOS 60D and almost got a zoom instead but I'm very pleased I got the prime now. For some reason I just don't like shooting with zoom lenses very much, especially on film. Maybe it's the way it slows me down and makes me think about composition more, rather than just zooming in or out. But thanks for the suggestions, much appreciated. I'll also have a look for the AF 50mm 1.8

 

[trythis]

series e 50mm f1.8
series e 100mm f2.8
nikkor 28mm f3.5

These are cheap but decent lenses and they will give you a feel for what you want later. You can sell them for what you paid for them if you dont like them or want to upgrade.

There is the 35mm f2.5 series E lenses for close to $100 when you can find them as well. I haven't used one, but they look tempting.

 

[Dan Fromm]

I bought my first Nikon in 1970. It came with a wonderful little booklet on photography that included Nikon's best advice on choice of focal lengths. In short, the good, if not ideal, progression was 1/2, 1, 2, 4, ..., i.e, in the Nikon scheme of things as it then was 24, 50 or 55, 105, 200, ... I followed Nikon's advice and never regretted it. My first four lenses were, in the order I bought them, 50/1.4, 200/4, 105/2.5 and 55/3.5.

Within a couple of years I'd scrapped the 50 in favor of the 55 and added a 24. Since then I've added a 1000/10 (I had a project for which it would have been useful, but the animals didn't cooperate as in weren't there at all), a 700/8 and, most recently a couple of cheap 400/6.3 teles. At some point I replaced the 105 and 200 teles with Nikon macro lenses. When part of my kit was stolen I replaced the 55, 105 and 200 macro lenses but not the 35, got a 35-70/3.3-4.5 instead. In retrospect I should have got another 35, the zoom isn't quite parfocal.

Back then 28 mm was seen as a sort of bastard focal length, too close to 24 and 35, too far from 50. Same with 135 mm.

 

[snapguy]

disargue

I have to respectfully disagree with Dan from...I don't know where. In 1970 Nikon came out with a 24mm f2.8 lens that was sensational. Most people shooting 35mm back then were used to the 28mm lens, the 35mm and the 50mm. The 28mm was a kind of standard non-normal lens, like the 135mm which I always loathed. Too long for portraits, too short for a telephoto. In those days you could buy a lot of inexpensive 28mm lenses. Evan Spiratone had them. In 1970 I was loaned an early Nikkor 20mm by the company I worked for and it had so much distortion it was pathetic. The newer 24mm sold back then in a lot of shops for 20 to 50 percent more than the list price, it was so new and desirable. That's how I saw it from my perch working for the world's largest news gathering organization in Manhattan, NY, NY.
We can't tell you which lens length to buy because you have your own vision but I think the 50mm is a good place to start.

 

[RattyMouse]

RattyMouse thanks for the help. I'm still undecided between the 85mm and 105mm but I guess I'll just get whichever is cheaper at the time, there's one on eBay now but it's "like new" in the box so I'm guessing it'll reach a high price! Just out of interest, how much would you consider to be a fair price for the 50mm f/1.8? I found a couple for £80-90 ($135-150), does that seem fair to you?


Thanks again for all the great help!

I have not bought the 50mm f/1.8 lens. I always use KEH as my guide for pricing. classic.keh.com is the place to go. Their new web site still is very beta as far as I'm concerned.

The 85mm f/2 lens is a shade faster than the 105mm f/2.5, but other than that, it is a wash. Get which ever one you can afford and enjoy.

 

[PKM-25]

I could travel the world forever with my FM3A, 28mm F2 AIS, 50mm 1.8 AIS & 105mm 2.5 AIS. All are spectacular wide open and closed down, even on a brutally lens pushing 36MP d*~tal camera...

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I don't much about Nikon lenses, but I'll go the 24mm and the 105 macro lenses.

Jeff

 

[chip j]

Get the 28-105 AF---very low linear distortion & sharp. It's all I use 85% of the time for a walk-around lens.

 

[Xmas]

I have a Pentax K1000 with a 28mm lens so maybe I should just use that for any landscapes or seascapes?

I know I'm the only person who can really decide this but I would like the opinions of people who use these lenses, thanks,

You should have bought another K lens instead of a FM2...

 

[NedL]

I got the 50F/2 AI for my FM2n from KEH for about $60. I love it. That's my "walking around" camera and lens. I don't care if it's 50 years old, it is a joy to use.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

You should have bought another K lens instead of a FM2...

That's very sound advice.
But, now that you bought a body and have no lens, you could sell your K1000 and lenses to fund the Nikon lenses you want.
Another thing, forget KEH prices, they're only for US. The UK market is different and more expensive.

 

[James-EG]

Thanks again for the help, I think for now I'll try and get the 28mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.8 and 105mm f/2.5, and as for choosing two of those for the holiday I'll probably leave the 28mm for now. Although my sister has a Nikon DSLR and would use the lenses so maybe she can help pay for one Regarding the K1000, it was given to me by my Grandfather, it was his pride and joy when he bought it back in around 1982 and I couldn't sell it. Also I was considering getting more lenses for it a while ago but I don't think I'll be able to use it much for now, it needs new mirror foam and I don't want to damage it. I'd like to have a camera and a couple of lenses that I can use a lot and not have to worry about them, which is why I got the Nikon. I've bought one lens for the K1000, a 50mm f/1.7 which cost me £20 sold as broken, however when I got it the problem was simply that the ring around the front element with serial number etc. was loose.

Thanks Ricardo I had thought about the price differences, annoying how everything is more expensive in the UK!

series e 50mm f1.8
series e 100mm f2.8
nikkor 28mm f3.5

These are cheap but decent lenses and they will give you a feel for what you want later. You can sell them for what you paid for them if you dont like them or want to upgrade.

There is the 35mm f2.5 series E lenses for close to $100 when you can find them as well. I haven't used one, but they look tempting.

This is a good idea and I wouldn't mind doing it but I'd rather get the lenses I've mentioned than trying other ones out like the series E lenses and reselling them to upgrade. I'm not sure I'd have time and I also know that I will get a lot of use out of the three I've now decided on so hopefully there should be no need to resell any lenses due to them not being used enough.

Thanks again for all your help, it is much appreciated! Now I suppose I just hope that the lenses I've found stay at decent prices...

 

[Vilk]

All manual Nikon primes are decent performers and you cannot go "wrong" with any of them. They are cheap and abundant these days so get one, play with it until you've had enough, get another, play, repeat sixty times... Or really, buy a mule, a bag full of them and play with a dozen a day!

Think fine wine and cheese--you won't start a youngster on epoisses and pauillac (not together! ) on day one... But a bit later, you won't get a grown man off epoisses and pauillac (though still not together). It's a matter of taste, culture, experience, occasion... Same with lenses. Popular glass like 28/2.8, 50/1.8, 105/2.5 is as competent as it is meh--try it to start forming your taste, to see what you may like, but remember that (if indeed, you do have tastebuds) you will move on. And eventually arrive at things like 50/1.2, 35/1.4--reeking mightily, dominating your palate for hours, but when you need them, there is no substitute.



It's not a goal, not a checklist, no science of must-have. It's a journey--and without a map, too!

 

[darkosaric]

Cheap, good build and great performer? Usually when you think it is too good to be true - it is not true.
But for manual nikkor lenses it is true. Super cheap (I got mine for 20€) nikkor-H 50mm f2 is all you will ever need from a 50mm lens.

 

[dorff]

Thanks Alex, I had considered a zoom although I decided against it, I just feel that using prime lenses will give me better results and will make shooting easier, I have a 400mm on my EOS 60D and almost got a zoom instead but I'm very pleased I got the prime now. For some reason I just don't like shooting with zoom lenses very much, especially on film. Maybe it's the way it slows me down and makes me think about composition more, rather than just zooming in or out. But thanks for the suggestions, much appreciated. I'll also have a look for the AF 50mm 1.8

The Series E 75-150/3.5 is a wonderful lens, especially for portraits. Don't underestimate it. It also sits very nicely on an FM2n. And it is cheap. While I don't argue against any of your suggestions, there are times when a good small zoom is very valuable. And it makes a good starting point while you flesh out your kit with primes.

 

[removed account4]

get a 50

good luck

 

[film_man]

If you never used primes before get ONE lens and after shooting a couple of months with it you'll know what you need. Don't feel like you'll miss shots or whatever, count it as part of the learning process. If you stick to it you'll find that a particular focal length will match you and you will then cover 90% of your shots with that. It will become immediately obvious what else you need, which will not be much.

Personally I loved my Zeiss 50/1.4 with my FM2n (when I had it). A bit over the budget I guess but the other 50 recommendations are good. Another lens you may want to look at is the Voigtlander 40/2. It is now my favourite and seems to match better my way of looking at things when shooting with 35mm cameras.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

I know it might be a bit of an odd question, at the moment I have no lenses for my new FM2n but hope to buy a 28mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4, 105mm f/2.5 and 180mm f/2.8 all AIS. Then maybe also a 35mm f/2 and 85mm f/2 if I feel they would be useful but the first four lenses are the priorities. I have found every lens on eBay but being 17 with only a saturday job puts a few limits on my money situation and after buying the camera I can only afford two of the lenses before I go on holiday in August. I'm quite sure the 50mm is one I can't really be without after all it is a standard lens, but then I'm stuck between the 28mm and 105mm, then there's an auction for a 180mm lens ending sooner than the 28mm and 105mm and I rarely see those for sale.

Overall I would just like to know which two of the four lenses you think I would be using the most, I would like to be taking photos of my family and the general scenery so I probably need an all round lens (50mm?) but I would also like to try and take other images that make me feel like I would need a lens with longer reach (105mm?). I have a Pentax K1000 with a 28mm lens so maybe I should just use that for any landscapes or seascapes?

I know I'm the only person who can really decide this but I would like the opinions of people who use these lenses, thanks,

My lens range is: 20/3.5 Nikkor UD; 28/3.5 Nikkor H, 35/2 Nikkor O; 2x 50/2 Nikkor H; 55/3.5 Micro Nikkor P, 105/2.5 Nikkor P. It will do anything and everything I will ever want to do with 35. The 28 I have is half a stop slower than the one in your list, and about 1/5 the price - I paid $40 shipped for mine. The 50/2 Nikkor is a wonderful lens, it compares favorably to a Summicron-R and costs about $40 - 60. I like mine so well that I got rid of the 1.4 and 1.2 50s. AIS versions of these lenses lenses will cost more than what I paid - but less than what you will pay for the faster 28 and 50 you mentioned. I didn't like the f:1.2 50 at all, and the 1.4 was unimpressive - YMMV. I use an F and two Nikkormats, an Ft and an Ftn and so do not need to pay for AI or AIS glass.