- Blog
- Bios
- Boards
- Classifieds
- DIY
- Gallery
- Vendor Reviews
- Shop Weddingbee
Weddingbee boards
I don't know what kind of lenses you should get, but that camera is super cool. My mom uses it as her travel one and she loves it.
Budget aside get the 24-70 and the 70-200 f2.8 This will cover 99% of what you will ever need.
If you are on a budget, get a 50mm prime, and an aftermarket zoom
Thanks @USER876:
Haha, so I was reading up on lenses last night, and now I'm obsessed with wanting good bokeh - which lense will give me that!?
Well I think I've answered my own bokeh question. I think I really want a 50mm / 1.4
I have a Nikon D60 and have the 55-200 and the 70-300 and love both. I want to get the macro lens next.
The lens you want or need depend on what kind of pictures you are taking. For example if you want close up pictures of say flowers with bees on it you are going to want the macro lens.
If you want to do wild life that is a ways a away you would want say like the 70-300 or bigger lens.
@luli29: I just got a Canon SLR so I not sure how close the prices are for Nikon... But the lens I ended up starting with is a Sigma 18-200 general purpose travel lens (~$300) to use instead of the kit 18-55 lens, which I keep on it at home. And I want to get the 50mm f1.8. (~$100) I really love the 10-24mm wide angle (~700), but that's a little too steep for me to jump into right now. I usually find that I need a wider angle more than zoom, and that 200mm is plenty. Besdies with the # of megapixels cameras have these days, I figure I can probably crop down to what I need and the resolution still be perfect for any size I'd want to print.
good choice on the camera! I have it and absolutely love it. some of my work if you want to see some examples of photos it takes...
I think I just need a general all purpose type of lense, and one that can do portrait length type photos, which is why I'm thinking the 50mm. I do want a macro eventually.
It depends on how much money you want to invest, but if you're interested in bokeh I'd say definitely buy prime lenses. Prime lenses are usually more expensive but that's because they are better quality. If you dont want to spend much at all, Nikon has the 50mm 1.8 and also a 35 1.8. I would definitely recommend the 35 because it will be closer to the focal length of a 50mm lens on a full frame body. I love the 50mm focal length for portraits but sometimes it is just too long if you are shooting indoors or in a small space. I think the 35 would be more versatile for a cropped body.
Lucky duck! I just have a D5000.
I took a photography class and the instructor extolled the virtues of a 50mm / f1.8, which I heard another photog call the "Nifty Fifty" because it's such a great lens.
Obviously, it's great for close shots.
The other lense you get probably depends on what kind of pictures you take most.
BTW, you can always rent lenses for a little while to see if you like them. A pro photog I know does that all the time.
Since there are some knowledgeable folks here, can I tack on a question?
My instructor told us what the look for when it came to the letters AFTER the data on the lense, but I don't remember what he said. There's AF, D AF...I can't remember which I'm supposed to get!
How do you all feel about Sigma lenses? I've heard they are comparable to Nikon ones?
@kate169: Bokeh is defined as the "quality" of the out of focus (blurred) part of a photograph, not to be confused with a narrow depth of field. Prime lenses give a narrower depth of field because they have a narrower aperture than zoom lenses. Cheap primes tend to have "harsh bokeh" due to a small number of aperture blades More expensive primes (>$500) tend to have "creamier" and higher quality bokeh due to more aperture blades and the shape of the blades.
Fast zoom lenses are typically around the same price as high quality primes. I wouldn't say that prime lenses are higher quality than zooms. Zoom lenses are more complex in design and have more moving parts. Because of this they tend to not be as sharp as primes.
@USER876: I know what bokeh is. I was posting from my own personal experience with different lenses. I do not feel that the 24-70 2.8 is really fast enough for good bokeh unless the subject is pretty far away from their background. On the other hand I've gotten pretty decent bokeh from my 50mm 1.8 on a regular basis.
Also, while some photographers prefer zooms, I would say most of the pros I have learned from in the past year (as well as myself) rely mostly on primes. I just think the quality of a prime is unmatched by a zoom...even the cheapo little 50mm 1.8 is a good tool for someone starting to experiment with photography. It's way better than a kit lens IMO and is only 100ish bucks. For 200ish dollars the 35 and 50 I recommended would be a good place to start. I will admit that I love the 70-200mm 2.8 and think it has absolutely amazing bokeh but in most situations it is really too long for a cropped body. I borrowed one to use at my last wedding and there were very few situations where I needed it.
@kate169: Good bokeh, bad bokeh, isn't going to change with aperture, it's a characteristic of the lens. Again, it's often confused with narrow depth of field, but it is not the same thing.
Portrait photographers tend to use primes more for single subjects, wedding photographers tend to use zooms more. You can't take a picture of a group of 3 people at F1.8, so it really depends on what you are photographing. Primes also don't have image stabilization which is very important for many aspects of professional photography.
The 24-70 f2.8 is one of the best lenses for creamy bokeh. The 50 1.8, may have a narrower depth of field, but due to it's design and aperture blades, the bokeh, is not that pleasing, it's pretty harsh. The 1.4 offers a slight improvement.
Inexpensive primes offer better image quality than inexpensive zooms. Expensive zooms offer similar image quality.
The example below shows "good bokeh" and "bad bokeh." It's not the depth of field, but the quality and "creamyness" of the out of focus area. The inexpensive primes, look very harsh IMO. Both of these were taken at the same aperture.
harsh bokeh
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/images1/bokeh/originals/DSC_2977.JPG
good bokeh
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/images1/bokeh/originals/DSC_2975.JPG
@USER876: I didn't know that that 'look' had a name, that's so funny. I feel like a terrible photographer now!
To OP: I'm a lens snob so I would recommend that you stick with Nikon glass and not a third party company. There is nothing wrong with Sigma, I've just never really liked their product.
Right now we have the lens that came with our Canon 60D, a 18-135 and it's a good lens, we're planning on upgrading that. We've got a 50mm f.1.8 that is amazing and we are currently debating a 100-400 L lens but at like $1200+ it's hard to justify it.
@USER876: Again, I do know what bokeh is. And I stand by my posts. What works for one photographer doesn't always work for someone else. The 24-70mm is a great workhorse lens but I really have never gotten spectacular results when using it or any zoom besides the 70-200mm. On the other hand, I actually have gotten some decent bokeh from my 50mm 1.8. Also, several area wedding photographers shoot with almost exclusively prime lenses, and I think even Jasmine Star uses mostly primes (though she does use zooms from time to time).
OP, I stand by my post and if you'd like to see portraits I've taken with different lenses for ideas you can PM me and I'll send yo some
@mittens111211: If you try the better Sigma and Tamrons, they are far better than kit lenses like the 18 - 35. Try renting one to check it out, or a L lens before you buy it. Honestly, I have all L lenses and couldn't go back but yes it's hard to justify the money if you aren't working as a photographer and for those reasons, Sigma and Tamron may work for you.
The 50mm f/1.8 is also called the "plastic fantastic" b/c it's cheap and light enough for beginners to play with lower depth of field. I bought one for my mom b/c she likes to take fun photos of gardens and it's easy for her to drag around.
@kate169: Not to be harsh, but just for brides who are talking to photogs and may be confused -- almost all the photogs I know (and we're talking a couple of decades now) use zooms. Yes, primes are incredibly sharp, but most need the flexibility of zooms and use the 24 - 70 and 70 - 200 to cover events and weddings.
Try the 50mm f/1.4 over the 1.8 -- a world of difference, and still way cheaper than the 50mm 1.0L.
@blu77: I'm not saying photogs DON'T use zooms. I actually admitted to using zooms myself in my prior post...they're just not my thing. And it is true that lots of wedding photographers PRIMARILY rely on primes, such as Jasmine Star and Justin & Mary who are all pretty famous if you ask me.
http://www.jasminestarblog.com/index.cfm?postID=1233&jasmine-star-lenses-and-camera
Also, I think any bride who hired either of those photographers would have a beast pro-photog, so I don't think it's confusing to a bride who is talking to photogs. If someone met with Jasmine Star and found out she uses primes more than zooms (GASP) they aren't going to hire her anymore?
My hubby would be so jealous! He has been wanting that camera forever! It was suppose to be his engagement gift but never happened! Did you get a good deal on it?
@kate169: I will hold my opinions on J. Star. Anyway, her blog shows just about every popular L lens canon makes as part of her bag, and her video clearly shows her with a 70-200 on her camera. An 85 1.2 for a wedding? Maybe for an hour for still portraits, thats it. It's one of the slowest focusing lenses that canon makes. Jasmine is more a lifestyle photographer than a photojouralist. Lifestyle photographers tend to gravitate more towards primes because of their sharpness, shallow depth of field, and the fact that they have more control over the session because the subject is posed.
All of the lenses listed on Jasmines website have their uses and non-uses and are typically part of a seasoned professional photographer's gear. Many wedding photographers carry two bodies around their neck, one with a zoom and one with a prime or macro lens. The zooms are usually the workhorses for action or photojournalism. You can read all you want, but when you work in the business, this is what you "typically" see.
It really doesn't matter, people can use what they want and should use what they can peform best with. I only jumped in because you were discounting zooms, and quality zooms play a very important part of photography.
Also, quality zooms cost as much as or more than primes.
The OP is seeking a general purpose, walk around lens, I think a zoom will give her more flexibility for this purpose.
@USER876: We will have to agree to disagree on this one then. I have been shadowing several wedding photographers in my area (including my own) who PRIMARILY use primes. And yes, using two bodies is one of the ways they/I am able to do this while keeping up with the fast pace of a wedding day. I still believe that primes > zooms just because of my own experience with them as well as that of my teachers/mentors.
You must log in to post.
| Visit our sister sites | eHarmony Online Dating |
eHarmony Advice Dating Advice |
Project Wedding Wedding Songs |
JustMommies Pregnancy Calendar |
Create the honeymoon of your dreams.
| User | Posts Today |
|---|---|
| Lyndzo | 52 |
| Brielle | 41 |
| mypinkshoes | 34 |
| Cady | 32 |
| fivemonthsnotice | 32 |
| AshleyR83 | 30 |
| ndreighton | 27 |
| rebwana | 26 |
| funkymunky85 | 26 |
| fishbone | 26 |
| User | Posts Today |
|---|---|
| caseyleigh10 | 5 |
| Ivorybuttons | 3 |
| Nic01 | 3 |
 Jamcnair |
2 |
| MamaMegs721 | 2 |
| Joyful80 | 2 |
| mousegirl | 1 |
| KateByDesign | 1 |
| Whitanella | 1 |
| Miss Sardine | 1 |
So excited. I only bought the body though...I need some lenses. I currently have a Nikon D80 and wanted to splurge for an upgrade.
Could anyone help in determining the top two lenses I "should" have right now. I think I need a general all purpose lense, and I'd like a macro one.
I don't know that much about cameras, but I'd like to learn how to master it!