[Steinar1]

My friend is an excellent photographer, but has stayed with film until now. He wants to convert to digital and would like my opinion on the 3 max 4 lenses to keep for private use only, but covering pretty much the whole gamut of photography; nature, family, portraits, street, macro, concerts and theathre, family sporrts, birds. As he never has to worry about selling or getting accepted, he only has his own tests to meet and, I have told him he should compete in competitions, but never for money, just for fun.



He wants to get a D7000 og wait for the successor to the D300s, definitely Nikon. My opinion is twopronged; A with zooms and B wih primes. Here are my recommendation, but knowing the knowledgebase available in this forum I would like him to benefit from this complete knowledge.



A:Zooms; Sigma 10-20, f3.5, Sigma 17-50 f2.8, Sigma 50-135 f2.8



B: Primes: Sigma 20mm f1.8, Nikon 35mm f1.8, Nikon 85mm, f1.8D, Sigma 150mm, f2.8 macro



Could you pls help with your input? You can not talk her out of DX or FX sencors!

Thanks in advanc for your help

[popo]

An interesting challenge: 4 lenses for "everything"? I think the choices would be swing depending on priorities and shooting style. Not helped here that I'm not familiar with the Nikon lens range so will be a bit more generic.



On the specific combinations presented previously, in option A why not replace the Sigma 10-20 with the 8-16? If not, I'd prefer the older variable aperture model anyway. Also I'm not familiar with a Sigma 50-135? I'd just play safe with a 70-200 f/2.8 there instead.

On option B I have to express a little caution there's no long focal length in there. The Sigma 150mm macro, from memory, doesn't AF with their 2x teleconverter so you're only going to get to 210mm with AF, which isn't much. I don't know if the new OS version is better in that regard.



My personal "4 lens" setup would be the following:

1: standard zoom. If you want a bit more range or fast aperture is down to preferences. I'd probably pick range over aperture for myself, so something like the Nikon 16-85mm would be nice.

2: tele zoom. Again depends on the uses, but for versatility I'd probably look at a 70-200 f/2.8 in this case. Where more range is needed, teleconverters could be added as required.

3: macro - too much choice here but I do like the Sigma 150mm. However given I suggested a f/2.8 tele zoom already, maybe a shorter focal length would give more interesting coverage? Maybe ditch a dedicated macro lens totally and use either filters or extension tubes with other lenses instead.

4: fast prime - a f/1.4-1.8 in the 30-50mm range depending on preferences.



The above would sacrifice the ultra-wide area though.



Side note, you used both "he" and "her" above...

[thxbb12]

Choice of lenses is so personal that it's gonna be difficult to give you the right advice unless we know more about your friend's shooting preferences. A typical question would be whether he value more fast apertures or longer reach or does he care about the bulk and weight or not, very wide angles or not, etc.

Not knowing any of these, I'd recommend different combos.



Zoom kit #1:

- Sigma 10-20 4-5.6 (or the newer 10-20 f/3.5) [landscapes]

- Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (non VC) (or Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 VC) [walkaround + portraits]

- Tamron 70-300 VC (or Nikon 80-400 for more reach but less IQ) [longer reach + birds]

- Sigma 105 f/2.8 macro (or Tamron 90 f/2.8 macro) [macro]



Zoom kit #2:

- Sigma 10-20 4-5.6 (or the newer 10-20 f/3.5) [landscapes]

- Nikon 16-85 f/3.5-5.6 [walkaround]

- Sigma 50-500 VC [everything + birds]

- Sigma 105 f/2.8 macro (or Tamron 90 f/2.8 macro) [macro]



Zoom kit #3:

- Nikon 16-85 f/3.5-5.6 [walkaround + landscapes]

- Tokina 50-135 f/2.8 [portrait + short tele]

- Sigma 50-500 VC [birds]

- Sigma 105 f/2.8 macro (or Tamron 90 f/2.8 macro) [macro]



Now, if I could throw in something else than Nikon, I'd recommend a Pentax K5 with the following kits:



Zoom kit #1:

- Pentax 12-24 f/4 [landscapes]

- Pentax 17-70 f/4 [walkaround]

- Pentax 60-250 f/4 [short tele + portrait + bird (short)]

- Pentax 100 f/2.8 macro [macro]



Zoom kit #2:

- Pentax DA* 16-50 f/2.8 [landscapes + walkaround]

- Pentax DA* 50-135 f/2.8 [portrait + short tele]

- Pentax DA* 300 f/4 [birds]

- Pentax 100 f/2.8 macro [macro]



Prime kit #1:

- Pentax 15 ltd f/4 [landscapes]

- Pentax 31 ltd f/1.8 [normal]

- Pentax 70 ltd f/2.4 [portrait]

- Pentax 100 f/2.8 macro [macro]

- Pentax DA* 300 f/4 [birds]

[Marc]

[quote name='Vieux loup' timestamp='1312495052' post='10394']



A:Zooms; Sigma 10-20, f3.5, Sigma 17-50 f2.8, Sigma 50-135 f2.8



B: Primes: Sigma 20mm f1.8, Nikon 35mm f1.8, Nikon 85mm, f1.8D, Sigma 150mm, f2.8 macro



[/quote]



To A:

Why only Sigma zoom lenses?



To B:

Forget the Sigma 20mm/1.8. It isn't a good lens, very soft wide open even on a D700. Unfortunatly the Nikkor AF 20mm/2.8 is not great either. Take a wideangle DX zoom instead.





Most interesting would be what lenses your friend is using now.

What are his preferred lenses/focal lenght?

[Steinar1]

[quote name='Marc' timestamp='1312543977' post='10407']

To A:

Why only Sigma zoom lenses?



To B:

Forget the Sigma 20mm/1.8. It isn't a good lens, very soft wide open even on a D700. Unfortunatly the Nikkor AF 20mm/2.8 is not great either. Take a wideangle DX zoom instead.





Most interesting would be what lenses your friend is using now.

What are his preferred lenses/focal lenght?

[/quote]





To clarify, my friend is a she, not he <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



Only Sigma lenses because their spectre is pretty representative of the choice one has and the price/value ratio is quite good.



My friend is using a 10 year old Nikon film camera with a 50mm, 85mm and 135mm Nikon lens. She is a good photographer, but not yet into digital SLR technology. Her main problem is deciding whether to go with zooms or, as would be her tendency, to use only primes.

[Guest]

[quote name='Vieux loup' timestamp='1312580556' post='10415']



My friend is using a 10 year old Nikon film camera with a 50mm, 85mm and 135mm Nikon lens. She is a good photographer, but not yet into digital SLR technology. Her main problem is deciding whether to go with zooms or, as would be her tendency, to use only primes.

[/quote]



I guess we on this forum can do little to resolve this dilemma...



Additionally, the list of subjects you gave above is extremely long (particularly if she's only using those three lenses above at the moment...). I'd just dump the birds, for example (unless they're really a main interest) because they require a really long lens, which, particularly if a prime setup consisting of only three to four lenses is desired, constrains the choice on the others way too much.



Also, you should give us a clue about the budget, about the weight this person is willing to carry, and about the quality requirements. The obvious four-lens zoom suggestion as far as quality goes is 12-24/4 DX + 24-70/2.8 + 70-200/2.8 + 85/1.4, but that costs a ton and weighs equally much... so swap the 85/1.4 for a 85/1.8 (or a 105/2.8 AF-S Micro) and the 70-200/2.8 for a 70-300 AF-S - now, is that good enough (that would be a clear yes for me, in fact, it's close to what I have - but other people's requirements may be different)?



If she wants more primes, I'd probably stick with the wideangle zoom and add a 50/1.4, 105/2.8 Micro, and 180/2.8 AF-D...



I think those lens choice threads are fun for speculation, but at the end, everybody's got to figure it out for themselves, especially if they're skilled photographers already...

[Steinar1]

[quote name='BG_Home' timestamp='1312709719' post='10442']

I guess we on this forum can do little to resolve this dilemma...



Additionally, the list of subjects you gave above is extremely long (particularly if she's only using those three lenses above at the moment...). I'd just dump the birds, for example (unless they're really a main interest) because they require a really long lens, which, particularly if a prime setup consisting of only three to four lenses is desired, constrains the choice on the others way too much.



Also, you should give us a clue about the budget, about the weight this person is willing to carry, and about the quality requirements. The obvious four-lens zoom suggestion as far as quality goes is 12-24/4 DX + 24-70/2.8 + 70-200/2.8 + 85/1.4, but that costs a ton and weighs equally much... so swap the 85/1.4 for a 85/1.8 (or a 105/2.8 AF-S Micro) and the 70-200/2.8 for a 70-300 AF-S - now, is that good enough (that would be a clear yes for me, in fact, it's close to what I have - but other people's requirements may be different)?



If she wants more primes, I'd probably stick with the wideangle zoom and add a 50/1.4, 105/2.8 Micro, and 180/2.8 AF-D...



I think those lens choice threads are fun for speculation, but at the end, everybody's got to figure it out for themselves, especially if they're skilled photographers already...

[/quote]



You are right and she will of course. She was just asking for good ideas from people who have used DSLR's for a while and I think there are some already. In reality, she will almost certainly start with a 35mm f1.8 Nikkor lens and take it from there. She will be borrowing some zooms and primes from me to test and, being a good photographer, she will find her own "optimal" approach"! But thanks to all who have provided suggestions.

[Brightcolours]

[quote name='Vieux loup' timestamp='1312721235' post='10449']

You are right and she will of course. She was just asking for good ideas from people who have used DSLR's for a while and I think there are some already. In reality, she will almost certainly start with a 35mm f1.8 Nikkor lens and take it from there. She will be borrowing some zooms and primes from me to test and, being a good photographer, she will find her own "optimal" approach"! But thanks to all who have provided suggestions.

[/quote]

But she already has the 50mm, 85mm and 135mm that will work on the camera.



So just advice her to get a standard zoom like the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 EX DG HSM and the Tamron 70-300mm f4-5.6 VC. And then a macro if she really wants a macro lens. The Tokina 35mm f2.8 DX would be a good choice, as it is both a good substitute for the 35mm f1.8 you mention and a macro lens.

[Guest]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1312721606' post='10450']

And then a macro if she really wants a macro lens. The Tokina 35mm f2.8 DX would be a good choice, as it is both a good substitute for the 35mm f1.8 you mention and a macro lens.

[/quote]



I don't think a 35 mm lens is a good choice if you really want a macro lens... unless all you do is copy stand work. The focal length is just too short - working distance is too short, background selectivity is poor. Just IMHO.

[Brightcolours]

[quote name='BG_Home' timestamp='1312739125' post='10460']

I don't think a 35 mm lens is a good choice if you really want a macro lens... unless all you do is copy stand work. The focal length is just too short - working distance is too short, background selectivity is poor. Just IMHO.

[/quote]

I disagree, I find the 35mm focal length on APS-C very charming. Much nicer perspective in the image. And background blur is fine.

I like 24mm, 35mm and 150-200mm for close ups/macro, and do not like 60-105mm on APS-C for that.



35mm (1:2):











150mm (2:1):







200mm (1:3):









I like the 35mm wider view a lot, and I like the narrow view of 150mm and up. I know what I am talking about when I recommend 35mm for macro on APS-C, it gives very nice results.I can't really fault the background selectivity either.... 50-60mm macro on FF was not popular without reason either (still have the lovely original Nikkor 55mm f3.5 micro (pre Ai)).