Nikon DSLR lenses

Messages
1,977
Location
Falkirk
Just invested in a Nikon D3500 camera with the standard 18-55mm kit lens.
great set up, not too expensive and suits my needs. I'm a novice to photography so learning the ropes.
in time might invest in other lenses. I've heard 50mm prime lenses are good for portrait (bokeh).
Also thinking of a telephoto lens. The Tamron 70-300 gets good and bad reviews. Anyone used it and can comment

not in a position to spend hundreds of pounds on lenses so my yardstick is decent quality budget (if there is such a thing)
any advice appreciated.
Bryan
 
I use canon, so may be of no use to you, but as a general rule I'd say budget lenses can be good but go for something just slightly above the entry level and you'd see a big difference.

Mine came with two lenses, one of which being the Canon 70-300 USM. It was absolutely AWFUL for colour fringing everything in photos. On bright days nothing looked nice so I sold it (for £60 ) and bought a Canon 55-250 IS STM for about £240. The stabilisation was good, the new stepper motor worked fast and the photo quality was significantly better in most conditions. Not much more expensive, but newer model and better all round.

I own a 70-200 IS F2.8 now, but that cost a bucket load more. I wouldn't have bought that as an initial purchase, even with hindsight of the original lens being rubbish.

On a separate note, I signed up to a local Facebook photography "Buy/Sell" page, and people sell the Canon 70-200 (non stabilised) F4 for about £300 second hand, which also would have been a superb option to start out. Maybe theres one near you? 2nd hand lenses are an excellent way to get what you're after.

P.s. you definitely do also want a small prime, like a 50mm F1.8 which are fairly cheap. Like you said, for the bokeh.
 
Just invested in a Nikon D3500 camera with the standard 18-55mm kit lens.
great set up, not too expensive and suits my needs. I'm a novice to photography so learning the ropes.
in time might invest in other lenses. I've heard 50mm prime lenses are good for portrait (bokeh).
Also thinking of a telephoto lens. The Tamron 70-300 gets good and bad reviews. Anyone used it and can comment

not in a position to spend hundreds of pounds on lenses so my yardstick is decent quality budget (if there is such a thing)
any advice appreciated.
Bryan
Nikorr has a great, cheap 50mm prime 1.8. I paid around £100 over 10 years ago for one and it is still going strong. I sling it onto film cameras and my DSLR. It's plastic and feels a bit shit compared to all-metal ones, however, being plastic means it is light and great for travel. It's also small and unobtrusive if you want to do some street/candid. It will be fine for portrait too but something around 85mm may be better. You will never regret buying the 50mm prime. As for the 70-300, what will you use it for? If it is the one I just saw on google search for around £120 or so, I wouldn't bother. At 300mm 5.6 you will need stabilisation to get a decent shot. My advice is to buy the 50mm prime, play around with the aperture on it and see how that affects your shots. Learn your camera and decide what type of photography you want to use it for then think about spending money on glass. I would always recommend buying the fastest lenses you can afford and stay away from the budget stuff, it will only disappoint. Second hand is always an option.
 
The lens I use most often by a large margin is the AF-S DX 35/1.8. I use it for almost all of my SOTD pictures, for example. The small size also helps to make the camera more "moveable" (remember, the best camera is the one you don't leave at home). It's simply fantastic.

My second most used is the AF-S DX 18-135/3.5-5.6. It's very versatile and can be used indoors and outdoors without the instant need for a tripod.

I also own the 18-55 kit lens and its 55-200 "companion", but both see very little use if any (I think it's been several years, actually).
 
Just invested in a Nikon D3500 camera with the standard 18-55mm kit lens.
great set up, not too expensive and suits my needs. I'm a novice to photography so learning the ropes.
in time might invest in other lenses. I've heard 50mm prime lenses are good for portrait (bokeh).
Also thinking of a telephoto lens. The Tamron 70-300 gets good and bad reviews. Anyone used it and can comment

not in a position to spend hundreds of pounds on lenses so my yardstick is decent quality budget (if there is such a thing)
any advice appreciated.
Bryan
You have been given some sound advice above - if you are serious about becoming a better photographer - in my opinion - another approach is to ditch the zooms initially - get two second hand prime lenses - ie fixed focal length - in terms of image quality versus cost - they will be vastly superior to zooms unless you get into the fully professional versions - with the matching price ticket - a 35 or a 50 - I own the version @Boab recommended and fully agree with his comments on it - light, cheap and pin sharp - I used to teach photography and our students were only allowed to use a 50mm for six months or so before they were given access to more exotic glass - but I personally would go for a 35mm - it better matches the way humans see - a wee bit wide but you don't get distortion problems at the edge of the frame - as can happen when you start getting wider. If you are interested in knocking out good portraits the other lens you need is a short telephoto - 85, 105 or 135mm - something like that - incidentally - bokeh has very little to do with the length of the lens - it is a function of the number of aperture blades in the design - the more the better. Often overlooked - buy good UV filters - I use B&W ones on all my lenses - and get appropriate lens hoods - they help with image quality - and also if you drop a lens nose down they will absorb some of the impact - cheaper to replace than the whole thing - oh - and in Scotland they help keep rain off the front element. I'm a press photographer based in Glasgow - I know of what I speak! With a 35 or 50 and a short tele there is very little you can't photograph well - in my experience - cheap zooms are just that. There is no point in buying a decent body and then sticking a milk bottle in front of it. As @owlman pointed out - the best sort of set up is one that you are happy to carry around with you - primes are compact, light and much more discreet - one lens on the camera - the other in your pocket. Hope this helps - cheers - I.
 
Been shooting Nikon since the 1960s and one lens I never used is the 85mm prime. (I have a Tamron 90/2.8 residing untouched in original box)
 
Last edited:
I'm invested in Nikon gear too and agree with above primes are great lens, excellent in low light, super sharp, light weight and easy to carry.

My most used lens is the 35mm prime, cheap enough new and even cheaper SH (wex or others)
Just to check you know, your camera has a APS-C sized lens so the mm do not equal the full frame sizes so a 50mm full frame lens will equal approx. 35mm on a APS-C (ish...)
 
Back
Top Bottom