Looking at picking up a decent lens for my nikon?

[kev]

Hey guys, as im out in the states atm in nyc i thought i'd look to grab a decent lens other than the stock 55mm one that came with it (nikon d3100). Any nice recommendations for something decent that wont break the bank yet be an improvement on the current lens? I would usually spend a few days researching but its going to be a bit of an impulse buy as I only have mobile tinternetz- i know some of you guys have some great knowledge here though

 

[Ola Englund]

A cheap one would be the 35mm f1/1.8
Really good fixed lens perfect If you want to do videos etc.

I mainly use my 50mm f1/1.4 and the 35mm for my videos.
The 50mm is expensive but it's the best lens I have.

 

[53Crëw]

If you want a zoom lens with more zoom than the D3100 kit lens, the 18-105 VR lens is good, although slightly pricey at around $400 IIRC. It's pretty nice, though.

Keep an eye out for rebates right now. There seem to be instant rebates on Nikon lenses about every other week or two where you can save $50 or $100 on a new lens.

 

[Joematthews]

Depends what you want to do... If you tend to take all your photos at a similar focal length then get a nikon fixed lens at that length.

Wide Angle-Tokina 11-16
Portrait-35mm F1.8, 50mm F1.4 or 85mm F1.8
Zoom- 70-200 F2.8... but at a cost
Macro- 105mm F2.8

If you want something REALLY cheap, the nifty fifty aka 50mm F1.8 is really hard to beat optically, certainly on canon anyway. I'd imagine the nikon isn't as poorly constructed as the canon version either, simply because that would be fucking difficult

 

[pipaguapique]

im also interested in this. I just gave my fiance that same camera and im sure eventually she would want a better lense

 

[arv_foh]

If you want a zoom lens with more zoom than the D3100 kit lens, the 18-105 VR lens is good, although slightly pricey at around $400 IIRC. It's pretty nice, though.

that is cheap for a lens dude. I've spent over $2k on a single lens

OP: what's your budget? Everyone should have a 50mm f/1.8, and they're cheap. It's a good buy for a "first additional lens"

 

[StefTD]

+1 on the 50mm f/1.8 lens, a friend of mine lent me his for some time, really digging
it and you can get a canon ef 50mm f/1.8 for 140$ new here, my next buy.
but it depends on what you want to shoot, I switch lenses all the time

 

[kev]

Thanks guys, shopping is commencing today so i will let you knw what i end up grabbing. Should have mentioned budget around 3-500

 

[oroinvictus]

I would not trust a $140 lens. If you're gonna buy a lens for a nikon, I would only get a nikon lens. Tamron lenses and the like have gone down in quality and quality control since their 80s and 90s era lenses.

 

[arv_foh]

I would not trust a $140 lens. If you're gonna buy a lens for a nikon, I would only get a nikon lens. Tamron lenses and the like have gone down in quality and quality control since their 80s and 90s era lenses.

You obviously don't know what you're talking about then. The 50mm f/1.8 is a Nikon lens and it takes sharp photos with beautiful bokeh

 

[grywolf627]

You obviously don't know what you're talking about then. The 50mm f/1.8 is a Nikon lens and it takes sharp photos with beautiful bokeh

As well as the Canon 50mm f/1.8. Though, I paid $120 for mine. And yeah, $400 is still a budget lens.

 

[53Crëw]

I meant compared to a $100-$200 prime lens, $400 might be a bit pricey. Kev said he didn't want to break the bank. Clearly, you can drop over a grand on an excellent lens.

 

[oroinvictus]

You obviously don't know what you're talking about then. The 50mm f/1.8 is a Nikon lens and it takes sharp photos with beautiful bokeh

Well excuse me for weighing in with my opinion. I know that cheap lenses can be great, cheap cameras are great 85% of the time, I just haven't had good experiences with lenses around that price.

 

[Joematthews]

I do hate the way my 50mm is built. Loosely put together out of brittle plastic, bleugh. It's still a great lens though as it's

A. Lighter than helium
B. Faster than Bolt and
C. Optically superb, tack sharp.

If it breaks I can't see myself buying another one as I don't really dig 50mm as a focal length on a crop frame, but I know I'll be a minority there. Discounting it because it's cheap is definitely a bit daft.

 

[grywolf627]

If it breaks I can't see myself buying another one as I don't really dig 50mm as a focal length on a crop frame, but I know I'll be a minority there.

Just depends on what you like to shoot, Joe. (but you know that ) For me, the 50mm is my go-to portrait lens. It just doesn't get better than this (for the money, at least). And put on an aps-c format camera body, it's equivalent to an 80mm...the traditional portrait lens. The drawback is, it still has the bokeh of a 50mm...not an 80mm. It's not bad at all, just very distinctive of a 50mm. When I want a buttery soft bokeh for a portrait, I'll just throw on my 55-250mm, somewhere in the 140 to 200mm range. Even with the smaller aperture, it still looks really nice at that focal range. I just have to back up PRETTY FAR to get them in frame.

My friend just bought the older version of the 50mm f/1.8. Man, I wish they kept building it that way. It's much more solid, and it has an inner focus ring, instead of that flimsy focus ring on the outside. I'm envious.

 

[Flat Fifth Fury]

Choosing a lens is very dependent on the subject matter and needs of the user. The kit lens is actually surprisingly good. Not superb but far better than you might think. If you need a low light lens, a macro, a portrait lens or a long lens for sports/wildlife are all specific needs. I agree that a bright normal focal length lens is often the best "next purchase" for the budding amateur which in your case would be the Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.8G. But maybe your application goes in a different direction. What does your kit lens not give you?

 

[Sweetnothing]

Choosing a lens is very dependent on the subject matter and needs of the user. The kit lens is actually surprisingly good. Not superb but far better than you might think. If you need a low light lens, a macro, a portrait lens or a long lens for sports/wildlife are all specific needs. I agree that a bright normal focal length lens is often the best "next purchase" for the budding amateur which in your case would be the Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.8G. But maybe your application goes in a different direction. What does your kit lens not give you?

This

And then again, it all depends on what are you gonna do with it, for landscapes, a fixed 50mm wouldn't be the better choice (wide lenses are the game on landscapes).

And the kit lens you have is a zoom lens, so a fixed lens will make you think and compose in a different way

Since I take portraits, people kind of pics, I picked the 50mm 1.8, love it, but for countryside kind of pictures it's a wrong choice since you'll end up wanting a wider image coverage.

Within your budget, to see a improvement in sharpness, go fixed IMO

If your camera has cropped image sensor ( mine has, but it's a 8 year old camera) take into consideration the multiplication factor...a 50 mm behaves like a 85mm would, 35 as a 50, etc ( aprox)

 

[kev]

Thanks very much guys. I was following all your posts and decided not to rush buy in the end. The main thing I was finding was that I could use a bit more zoom than the 18-55 could provide. I wonder whether to go as far as a 300mm. Im sure getting a quick fixed length lense would be dead handy too. I guess what I have found is the 18-55 is a jack of all trades master of none type lense.

 

[grywolf627]

Kev, if you want more reach but still within a budget, I'd suggest a 55-250mm. I have the Canon 55-250mm, I got (new) for just a little over $200. I don't know what lenses Nikon has, but I'm sure they have something similar. I THINK the crop factor of your body is 1.5 (?). So...that 250mm on that body will be equivalent to 375mm. I don't know about Nikon, like I said. But as for my Canon lens, it may be a budget lens, but I friggin' LOVE it. The image is beautiful with it. It may only be a f/ 4 - 5.6 lens. But when zoomed in to 150mm or more...even f/5 makes a really nice bokeh. I found even at the top end, at 250mm...it is still very sharp. Just my 2 cents.

 

[arv_foh]

Thanks very much guys. I was following all your posts and decided not to rush buy in the end. The main thing I was finding was that I could use a bit more zoom than the 18-55 could provide. I wonder whether to go as far as a 300mm. Im sure getting a quick fixed length lense would be dead handy too. I guess what I have found is the 18-55 is a jack of all trades master of none type lense.

55-200 VR is pretty good for the price, and if you're keen to spend 500ish the 70-300VR is good as well.