A&P Its shopping list time!!! :hs:

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by dmora, Jun 2, 2004.

  1. dmora

    dmora Guest

    Help dis noobian out. :hsd: I need to know what im supposed to get after i recieve my D70

    Point me in the direction of:

    -UV Filter
    -Polarized filter
    -A good low light/night lens
    -A good wide angle lens
    -A good macro lens
    -A good telephoto (10-30 meters?) Do i even need a tele for that range?

    Tripod should be easy i'll just go to my local store. Unless yall know of some deals. :dunno:

    am i missing something? :hs:
     
  2. TypeSDragoon

    TypeSDragoon Guest

  3. BLKDVLGSX

    BLKDVLGSX OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    Messages:
    40,428
    Likes Received:
    15
    Location:
    Buford, GA
    tiffen

    tiffen

    Stock lens (18-70mm DX Zoom-Nikkor)

    10.5mm f/2.8G ED AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor or 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5D AF Zoom-Nikkor

    60mm f/2.8D AF Micro-Nikkor

    70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED AF Zoom-Nikkor

    :bigthumb:

    I'm picking up the DX fisheye for my D70 in a few weeks, I played around with one at the store and I fell in love
     
  4. dmora

    dmora Guest

    I dont want fisheye :hs: i want wide angle :sad2: Or is that just a name.
     
  5. SL1200MK4

    SL1200MK4 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,552
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hum... Fish eye is not exactly the same as ultra-wide angle. Fish-eye lens have very strong barrel distortion, to the point where you can use as an artistic effect. Also fish-eye might have corners cut off and the final image will look like a circle.

    Wide-angle on the other hand is just wide-angle, it too might suffer barrel distortion, but they are not necessary the same.
     
  6. SL1200MK4

    SL1200MK4 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,552
    Likes Received:
    0
    you might need a circular polarizer filter depends on the lens that you have.

    a good low-light lens, I would recommand prime. get either the 50 f1.8. Or 85mm/24mm depends on your need.

    60mm f/2.8 for Macro, one hell of a lens. Of course this might not be the lens for you focal length wise depends on what type of photography you do

    I personally won't recommand the Nikkor 70-300mm ED. Because, you might as well get the G version of the lens. The extra ED glass element doesn't make much difference if any at all. So, if you don't mind the plastic mount, get the G version if you wanna stick with Nikon lens.

    You can consider the 70-300mm from Tarmon, it is rumored that the Tamron actually OEM the Nikon ED version of the lens. Tamron cost less and has extra Macro feature.

    You can also consider the Sigma 70-300mm APO MACRO SUPER II, hell of a lens for the money, and the picture quality is on par if not better than the Nikon ED one. I have this lens myself.

    Now, it seems to me that you are just starting with the D70. So, if you don't already have Nikon film SLR system, I had recommand that you don't buy too much stuff to start with. I think you might end up wanting to switch system later on down the road. I think to start, you can get away with the following 2 lenses most of the time.

    18-70mm kit lens
    70-700mm with MACRO. So, either the Sigma or the Tamron will do.

    That should do the trick for you most of the time. For extreme low light, perhaps you might wanna consider a 50mm prime and start have some fun.
     
  7. Merli

    Merli gplus.to/merli OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2002
    Messages:
    18,215
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    AF-S 17-55mm f2.8
    AF-D 14mm f2.8
    AF-D 105mm Micro
    AF-S 70-200 VR
    AF-S 200-400 VR

    That'll keep you occupied for a while :hs:
     
  8. dmora

    dmora Guest

    Prices?? :hs:
    The wide angle i want to shoot cityscapes and maybe cars up close. Less barrel distortion the better.
     
  9. dmora

    dmora Guest

    Are these all Nikon made?
     
  10. SL1200MK4

    SL1200MK4 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,552
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes... But hum... that's some serious investment.

    Basically for Nikon film DSLR there are 3 zoom lens that you will want.

    17-35mm 28-70mm 70-200mm They are all f2.8, SWM, full time M/A focusing... etc. While the 70-200mm got VR. But Those will cost you just little over 4 grand for the 3 lens.

    However, when it comes down to the digital world. Things gets tricky. Because of the 1.5 crop. The 28-70mm is not wide enough all of a sudden. So, Nikon comes out with the 17-55mm DX. It's a very good lens, but it will only work with DSLR with APS-C sensor size. So, if you decide to get a Film SLR, you won't be able use that 17-55 lens.

    On the other hand, the 17-55 is optimized for digital and can replace both the 17-35 and 28-70mm f2.8 for many people. Remember less lens change the better with DSLR, you dont' want to have dust on your sensor.

    Also the 200-400VR itself is about hum... 4 grand. I doubt that will be the lens for you.

    Alternative to that lens would be... The new AF-S VR 200mm/f2. You can get 3 teleconverter for it. 1.4/1.7/2X
    This is also an very costly option, but gives you a faster f stop in some case.

    80-400mm VR, or the Sigma version of 80-400mm OS. Those cost about a grand, both have image stablization. But their focus is slow... Also, not exactly a fast lens.

    Sigma 50-500mm also known as the Bigma. This lens does not have img. stablization. But it does have HSM, so the focusing is fast, and gives pretty good result if you know what you are doing.

    So, with all that said... Unless you have a ton of money to burn, perhaps many of those high-end lens is not for you. Also you might want to do more research before you buy anything. Make sure you play around with them extensively to know what you really like.

    Personally I would get the 70-200VR first. THE best lens that I have had.

    I will NOT get the 80-400 VR nor the Simga version of it. Because the focus is slow. If you really need the reaching power of 400mm, and is tie on budget. I had make do with 70-200VR with a 2X tele-coverter.

    The 50-500mm sigma is an amazing lens for the money as well, but it does have many limitations, but I take HSM over VR. I hope Sigma makes a 80-400mm with both HSM and OS or Nikon makes one with SWM and VR.

    I honestly believe that you should start witht he kit lens, and maybe just a 70-300G, or the Sigma 70-300 APO if you want macro. Give yourself a few month. You will know if you really need a lens for lower light, if so at what range? Also what kind of telephoto lens that you will need. When you got those figured out. Then it's time for you to buy some serious glasses.
     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2004
  11. dmora

    dmora Guest

    :bowdown: Thanks!
    I dont plan on buying any of this stuff any time soon. I just need an idea of what i can expect. Obviously, buy the time im able to afford any of this stuff, there will be better ones on the market.
    I'm sticking with the kit lens for now for obvious reasons. I'll goof with that so that i can get an idea of what im doing.

    :wiggle:
     
  12. BLKDVLGSX

    BLKDVLGSX OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    Messages:
    40,428
    Likes Received:
    15
    Location:
    Buford, GA
    that is why I put a wide angle lens on the list as well :squint:
     
  13. SL1200MK4

    SL1200MK4 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,552
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yet I realized that... All those talk about that 1.7X teleconvertor lately... Damn I guess I really want it... Kept on thinking about it... :hs:
     

Share This Page