cr1218

I am new to the universe of Nikon lenses. I just bought a d3400 which is an APS-C, DX, camera. So ideally lenses would not be FX. That's because the APS-C sensor will only use the central part of an FX lens, exaggerating any defects it may have. At least, according to Tony Northrup in a video titled "20 Things Most PHOTOGRAPHERS Get WRONG", at about 18:15.

Anyway these are the lenses I have coming.

macro: Nikon AF-S DX Micro-NIKKOR 40mm f/2.8G
50mm prime: Nikon AF FX NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8D (oops, FX lens)
35mm prime: Nikon 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX Lens
kit lens: 18-55 VR
kit lens: 70-300

Questions for a Nikon Noob:

Is [ Nikon AF-P DX NIKKOR 10-20mm f/4.5-5.6G VR ] my best option for getting a wide angle?
Is there a prime 10mm for DX?
Is there a 50mm prime for DX?
Is the 50mm prime, above, about 75mm on a DX?
What would be some interesting discontinued lenses to consider?
Should I avoid CX lenses, unless I don't mind a recalculated focal length?
When a lens is advertised as FX/DX, are they assuming one will recalculate the focal length for DX?
This one looks promising: [ Tokina AT-X PRO 11-16mm f/2.8 SD MF DX IF AF Lens ]


Thanks for your comments!

mkiegold86 Loc: New York, NY. U.S.A.

When I first got a D5600 I purchased a Tamron 10-24mm. which give me a 15-46mm result on a crop sensor. I have found this lens to be for my wide-angle needs. I shoot a lot of landscapes and this lens has proven to be indispensable.
Its true you can use FX glass on a DX format but unless you plan to buy a FX camera its rather a waste.

wetreed

When I bought my D5300 just over a year it came with Nikon 18-140 vr lens. This lens has exceeded every possible expectation anyone could ever have. It focuses really fast, tact sharp, really good in low light and really versatile.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Two things:

Read Ken Rockwell's Best Dx lens lineup: https://kenrockwell.com/nikon/dx-dream-team.htm

Look at the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 ART lens.

swartfort Loc: Evansville, IN

I too shoot with the d3400. I like the camera (and if you click on my link below you can see some results). I upgraded my 70-300 kit lens to a AF-s 70-300 VR ED G 4-5.6 lens. It is technically an FX lens, but I really like the results PLUS I liked the fact that unlike the DX version it has external switches for AF and VR. It is a bit faster than the DX version also. I don't shoot much wide angle stuff, and any landscape or street photography I have done, I have been happy with the kit 18-55.

Best of luck in your experiences

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

TN definitely gets this wrong each time he tries to double down on his misunderstanding of perceptual megapixels.

He is wrong.

The center part of any lens is better than the edges. All you need to do to check this is to look at any MTF chart, or review where lenses are measured at the center, edges and extreme corners. Very few lenses offer exceptional quality into the corners, at least not wide open.

If what he claims is true, then the PC-E and Tilt/Shift lenses should be horrendous on FX cameras, since their image circle is almost big enough to cover medium format to allow for shift and tilt.

This MTF summary graph shows center/edge/corner performance

https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-24mm-f1-4g/2

As you can see, it always performs better in the center part of the lens, which, incidentally, is the part that a DX camera uses. So the lens on a DX camera would have more consistent sharpness and freedom from aberrations that might be present if it where used on an FX body.

What does exaggerate things is when you magnify a DX image to make a print. You have to use 50% more magnification to get to the same size.

A lens does not lose sharpness when you put it on a smaller sensor camera. You will get better performance using FX lenses on a DX camera.

A CX sensor is even smaller than DX, and has a 2.7 crop factor compared to the 1.5 on DX. In all likelihood a CX lens will not cover a DX camera sensor, so it is completely out of the question.

You do not have to recalculate focal lengths based on sensor coverage - a 50mm FX lens will still be a 50mm lens on a DX and on a Micro4/3. The difference is the crop factor and what it does to angle of view. On a DX camera any 50mm lens will give you a field of view similar to a 75mm lens, and on a MFT camera it will be similar to 100mm.

To my knowledge there are only two 10 mm lenses - the Nikon 10.5 F2.8 DX Fisheye, and the manual focus 10mm F2.8 Rokinon which will give you a field of view similar to 15.75mm and 15mm respectively.

I hope this clarifies things a little.

cr1218

Thank you all very much for the kindness of your replies. I am digesting your contribs.

uhaas2009

I have DX lenses: 10.5mm f2.8 G ED fisheye and 17-55mm f2.8 G ED and tokina 100mmFX. What’s the point: my d7000 have a build in autofocus motor the 3400 body don’t have this. For some lenses is this good for some is this bad.... my 17-55 2.8 is a beauty on any body.
The 10.5mm isn’t nice- auto focus runs lightly errors-can’t switch Manuel and auto focus on lens but my camera body does, the 3000 series don’t have.
I sold a DX zoom lens what was a beauty on the 3000 series but not on the 7000 series.
Tokina 100 mm is slow in focusing but focus right all the time.
A 28-80 mm 3.3-3.5G fully plastic but works great
Nikon build all kind from awesome good, Weird to bad

uhaas2009

I have DX lenses: 10.5mm f2.8 G ED fisheye and 17-55mm f2.8 G ED and tokina 100mmFX. What’s the point: my d7000 have a build in autofocus motor the 3400 body don’t have this. For some lenses is this good for some is this bad.... my 17-55 2.8 is a beauty on any body.
The 10.5mm isn’t nice- auto focus runs lightly errors-can’t switch Manuel and auto focus on lens but my camera body does, the 3000 series don’t have.
I sold a DX zoom lens what was a beauty on the 3000 series but not on the 7000 series.
Tokina 100 mm is slow in focusing but focus right all the time.
A 28-80 mm 3.3-3.5G fully plastic but works great
Nikon build all kind from awesome good, Weird to bad

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

When a camera is bought the camera either comes with a lens, usually called kit lens or we select a lens for that camera. In my humble opinion and especially for someone that is just starting, a kit lens and in this case the 18-55 would be a good start. You should work with that lens and learn it well. It will be your best guide to tell you what other lenses you should buy in the future.

Depending on your shooting habits you will select your lenses. If you find that 18mm seems to be enough as a wide angle there is no reason to spend more money. The 55mm end will give you an equivalent of a 100mm lens using the so called "full frame" camera and that focal length could be exactly what you need for portraits and to isolate part of the subject when shooting landscape photography. If 18mm is not enough then there are many choices and the Tokina lens you refer to has excellent reviews. Understand that a wide angle requires good use, it is not a lens to capture everything in a photograph but rather it is an excellent choice when the photographer wants to come closer to the subject to emphasize it. The background is made much smaller with wide angles which recedes in distance.

Tele zooms, like the 70-300 also have their applications. At times they can serve you well for wildlife photography, portraits at around 70mm and many of them offer close focus so that you can try some "macro" photography. Isolating a part of the landscape with them is a common practice among landscape photographers.

When using a FX lens with a camera such as yours indeed it is the center of the lens what the sensor uses. A 35mm lens will be with your camera the equivalent of using a 50mm lens with a "full frame." That is a good choice. The 50mm prime acts as a 75mm lens with your camera. The 10-20 as far as I know works with your camera but if it is the best wide angle option for you I do not really know because, as I said it all depends on your shooting habits. Being an extreme wide angle like it is you need to know how to use the lens because otherwise it will disappoint you.

As far as I know CX lenses are not for use in your camera but in the recently discontinued series 1 mirrorless cameras. If there is an adapter that you can use with those lenses I am not aware of it but I would use only lenses made for your camera.

It is too late now to make you recommendations on what lenses to buy since you have not used any and just ordered a few of them. As I said, using only the 18-55 would have been a good start unless you have used lenses before and you know how to select what you need.
I forgot to mention that there is nothing wrong using FX lenses with your camera but if you use DX lenses then the lens uses the whole sensor and that to me is full frame.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

A topic with so much disagreement and controversy would lead me to buy a lens to match the camera. If the differences in the results were that dramatic, there would be no controversy. Over the years, the general advice has been to buy FX lenses because they're better, and if you make the move to an FX body, you'll be all set. When you need a microscope to tell which is better, neither is better.

ELNikkor

Just as an observation, you probably could have held off on the 40 macro and the 50mm FX, since you already are getting an 18-55 and a 35 1.8. My 18-55 on my D5100 has had all the sharpness and close-focusing I've ever needed. Don't assume because it is a "kit" lens that it falls short in these categories! I would recommend the 10-20 Nikon lens as it is reasonably priced and will take care of all your wide-angle needs. (Send back the 40 and 50 in exchange.) If you are looking for a macro lens, get a longer focal length so you can be a bit farther from your subject.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

I'd use an fx lens on a dx body because it ONLY uses the center portion of the lens, eliminating the distortions of the edges of lens. As a result, you've missed out on one of the best lenses available, the Nikon 28-300mm. My recomendation? Send the 70-300mm back and get a 28-300. It's a great lens, as attested to by many on the hog. Not only is it excellent photographically, but you can put it on your camera and never worry about other lenses. As it is, you'll have to take IT (the 70-300) off in order to shoot wider shots. With the 28-300 that is not a problem. Wait until you go on vacation....you'll see just how convenient the 28-300 would have been. You're not going to gain anything photographically over the 28-300 with the 70-300.

Fotomacher Loc: Toronto

I am not sure that your opening premise holds true. “Use only DX lenses on a DX body”. I have owned 3 DX bodies, a D70s, D300 and D300s and for the most part used only FX lenses. Now, these bodies had a built in focus motor (which the D3xxx and D5xxx bodies do not) and an aperture feeler which gave me the ability to use Nikkor AF lenses and Nikkor AI-s lenses. I think I got excellent IQ from these lenses at a very reasonable price and still use them on my more currrent D810.

NCMtnMan Loc: N. Fork New River, Ashe Co., NC

I have a D7200 and if you want ultra wide angle, then I recommend the Nikkor P 10-20mm designed for DX cameras. It is not expensive, very light weight and excellent glass. As for the rest of my lenses, I buy based off of my need, pocketbook and quality of the lens. Not whether it is DX or FF. While I will spend a few dollars more for a comparable FF lens, there are DX lenses that on par with many FF lenses, and may cost less. If I go to a FF body, my FF lenses will be fine there and so will my DX lenses. They will just shoot in crop mode on the FF body.