snapclick47

Hi All,

I have, like most people who travel a few places, taken fancy to serious photography, because the mobile clicks are just not doing justice to the fantastic scenery i have witnessed in few of my trips.

So the process began and all things considered(mostly the size of my pocket), have narrowed down to the camera body I would like to go with. I have finalized it to get the Nikon D5200.

But, then came the choice of lenses.. and that was the point I had to stop reading and start asking questions as well. Hence this account, and this forum.

So, after innumerable considerations, and disappointments of a smaller pocket(not being able to afford smart ass glasses like the 16-85), I am more or less convinced, to start off with a single lens(most likely a kit lens), and see about which lenses i would like to add to my bag as I expolore and grow as a photographer. And as i grow, decide what kind of better zoom lens I would want(conspicuously eyeing the 70-300).

That said, search has led me to these three basic models of lenses, which I cannot choose from based on just reading already existing posts:

1. Standard kit 18-55 VR lens. (Seems inadequate to most people on a single lens system)

2. Kit lens 18-105 VR lens. (Seems to be one I am angling towards at the moment, mostly due to the direct adaptability of polarizing filters(the non rotating zoom part))

3. Kit lens 18-140 VR lens. (Might be too big, I do plan to go on a dual/multiple lens system in future, and i dont believe in the "one lens for all" philosophy).


That said, I am honestly lost with all these numbers, and a bit overwhelmed I must say. So, i would like the experts here to take some of their valuable time and give me some pointers with my measly little doubts.

Please feel free to tell me my entire thought process is wrong, and I need to start from scratch.. Or the D3300 would be a better choice over the D5200? Or I should stick to the standard 18-55, 55-200 dual lens system from the word go! I would prefer doing that, rather than to sell my system, and search for a new one.


Thanks in advance.

Cheers!
Sc31

Db7423 Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

Welcoming me to the Hog, Sc31. There is a reason the 18-55 and 55-200 lenses are part of a standard offering- they give you quite a lot of flexibility. I would stick with them until you have more experience with the lenses you have. Later you will have a better understanding of the focal length(s) you most frequently find yourself using. You don't say what camera body you are currently using with the 18-55 and 55-200. ;)

snapclick47

Hey, thanks for the reply,

This will be my first camera, so I havent personally used any lens body, did some shots with my cousins canon (not sure the model) and 18-55/55-200.

I was just looking to find a cheaper option to going up to 300, eventually, instead of taking up the 55-200.

Meaning, i would use the single lens for a while, without needing too much extra, basically for street, and some landscape. And then buy a proper zoom lens(again eyeing the 70-300), completely ditching the 55-200(saving some money in the process). Because I know I wont be sticking with the 55-200 in the long term.


Let me know if its a f**all plan. And I need to stop overthinking this.

Cheers!
Sc47.

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

The D5200 is a great camera (previously owned on my part). I like your thought about the 18-105mm lens.

snapclick47

Thanks Mr. Wallace, I am also considering the D3300, since it is an entry level camera, and I am an entry level photographer.. And it has a few features better than the d5200, like a wider view finder, better iso in low light etc. Thanks for the confidence in my choice of lens though.. Most likely that is the one I would go with.

dmeyer Loc: Marion, NC

I've been shooting with both the D5100 and D5300 for several years and the lens that accounts for 95% of my posts is the Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 DX VRII. It seems to be an underappreciated lens but I would offer this perspective: if you can cover a range from 18-170+mm with sharp results and still get respectable images at 200mm, why limit yourself to 105mm or 140mm? The price has dropped about $200 since its introdection. The ospreys in the following link (#1-#3) were shot at 170mm max. and then cropped and are still quite respectable--I would have missed the opportunity altogether with anything shorter. http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-332829-1.html
Food for thought. :-)

donnahde Loc: Newark, DE

LOVE my 18-140 on both my D5100 and my D7100.

snapclick47

I have seen some conparision video for the 18-105 and 18-140, and 18-140 clearly seems the sharper of the two, but is it filter friendly like the 18-105? I haven't found that info anywhere.. Can you shed some light on that?

Cheers!
Sc47

snapclick47

True, I had not considered the 18-200 simply based on the range being too long.. Which is why I was more inclined towards the 18-105 but the results on 18-140 were clearly better in a comparison video, hence the consideration.. But I will revisit my thought process as you suggested and throw the 18-200 in the mix as well.

Cheers!
Sc47

donnahde Loc: Newark, DE

The 18-140 has threads and I think the size is 67. I don't have a filter for it right now but I see no reason why it wouldn't take one.

snapclick47

My concern is with the polarizing filter especially. On the 18-55 I need to first zoom the desired amount, and then put the filter on.. Because the front end rotates with zoom.

On 18-105, the front end is fixed with whatever zoom, so I can put the filter and not worry about adjusting my zoom later, because it keeps straight.

How does it behave with the 18-140?

Cheers!
Sc47.

donnahde Loc: Newark, DE

Sorry, I don't have polarizing filter for that lens but I just looked at it and I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work fine. The front end is fixed with any zoom as far as I can tell. I use a polarizing filter on my 55-300 with no problem and the front of both lenses are the same.

snapclick47

Thanks, that helped a lot! :)

Cheers!

jcboy3

I recommend the 18-140 VR over any others for DX. It has metal mount, weighs only slightly more than the 18-105, and is significantly sharper.

Don't discount the hassle of carrying multiple lenses and switching between them. I don't see the value when you have enough to worry about learning how to shoot.

When you want to add more lenses, consider some faster primes (both the 35mm DX and 50mm FX) and possibly longer (up to 300mm).

It is "filter friendly", in the sense that the lens does not rotate with zoom or focus.

You can consider the 18-200, but it's bigger, heavier, costs more, soft at 200mm, and some complain that is suffers from zoom creep (version II has a zoom lock). So walking around with this lens will change your focal length. It does have one advantage; it has a distance scale. This is useful for focus stacking. But I just use the ribs of the focus ring on the 18-140 to define steps between two focus points. Works just fine.

Bottom line, get the 18-140. Follow up with a 35mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/1.8 (which works well as a portrait lens), and then a 70-300.

Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

Snap', What type of shooting do you expect to be doing? People? Wildlife, landscape, or just about anything?