Even though we ARE Nikon lovers,we are NOT affiliated with Nikon Corp. in any way.

English German French

Sign up Login
Home Forums Articles Galleries Recent Photos Contest Help Search News Workshops Shop Upgrade Membership Recommended
members
All members Wiki Contests Vouchers Apps Newsletter THE NIKONIAN™ Magazines Podcasts Fundraising

post-NAS-syndrome : need help rationalising my lenses

agileflower

London, UK
31 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author
agileflower Registered since 02nd May 2010
Sun 19-Sep-10 05:38 PM

I'm sure you've been here I started out with a kit lens and thought hey better lenses would make me better pictures. I learned that I needed to make myself better, and I have come a long way - but now I have a slug of lenses and am trying to rationalise them in the most sane way, fill gaps, get rid of redundancies etc.

I have a D90 and was thinking of the D300s but am going to wait and see if D400 is priced where I can get it. I may just keep the D90 forever So, my current lens 'stash' and my reasons/lack thereof for having them:

I have a 35 f1.8 prime: main purpose is indoors, my son, at night, in the flat. Anything longer is too big for my space and anything in the relatively inexpensive wide zoom range is too slow to work well.

I have a 50 1.4 which is too long for the above purpose but which is great all around, I really like it.

I have a 12-24 f/4 recently purchased when I sold my Tamron 10-24 as I wasn't happy with that. From what I'm gathering it doesn't always like shooting at f/4 so I'm resigned to feeling like I need a faster wide angle ('need'?) - for my son's dances etc. I can't see getting rid of it because its such a fun lens.

I have a 16-85 3.5-5.6. Its my outdoors/walk around/see stuff/take pictures lens. I love it. I got rid of my 18-200.

I've got the 105vr micro. It serves its dedicated purpose of being a macro.

I've got the Tamron 90, but I don't use it, I'm selling it.

I've also got the 70-200vr1. It serves its dedicated purpose of sporting and theater events. It should get more use, really, but for 'personal safety' reasons I feel a bit awkward in my local area just walking around with it.

My thoughts in general. I love my 16-85, but I do miss the extra bit of reach sometimes. However, I'm not sure if the 24-120 will make me happy, as I shoot Dx and I would miss the 16-24 range. I'm happy to change lenses more than my other half is happy to stand around while I do it, if you see what I mean. I'd rather lose the reach than the wide end, but its not fast enough for indoors/people etc, hence my thought of the 17-55. Maybe I'm trying too hard to rationalise more NAS What I do now when I go out and am not sure what's coming, I carry the 16-85 on the camera and bring the primes and use them depending on which is most appropriate. (Again, drives the other half bonkers, why can't I use a point and shoot, etc?)

My priorities are: flexibility in the wide end that might be provided for by speed - but how much will I really gain going from my 16-85 to the 17-55? Will I just never pick up my 16-85 again? (I understand the 17-55 is super heavy). Am I doing something wrong with my 12-24 that I can't seem to use it for wide indoors/people moving low light or is that just simply not ever going to be fast enough? Another priority is a flashgun, as onboard flash is generally horrifying me and I avoid its use at all costs - and I have no tripod.

I'd really appreciate your thoughts/critiques/questions/enablement
Thanks so much!

Tracy



G