I just got my D7000 and I'm wondering what my first lens purchase should be. I want the lens for vacation photos (beach, architecture, candid portrait). I plan on getting a 70-200 2.8 but I dont want to lug it to the beach and walking around all day (heavy and $$$$). What would be a good lens in the $200-$400 range to take on vacations?
Sat 03-Dec-11 04:49 PM | edited Sat 03-Dec-11 04:51 PM by texspeel
Jim, I think a very versatile lens, given the categories you listed, is the Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6 lens. I took it and a few other lenses with me when I took my D7000 to France last year. Two weeks later when I got home, I realized I'd never taken the other lenses out of their cases. The 28-300 more than adequately covered everything I wanted to shoot. I'm sure there are other equally versatile lenses that others can recommend. So your problem will be to narrow your choice among several great options. Tom PS - Just realized you said in the $200-$400 range. The 28-300 is out of that range but isn't terribly expensive.
"Nothing can be recognized without light and shade. It is only through the eye, the window of the soul, that we can truly understand the complex workings of nature." - Leonardo da Vinci
Sat 03-Dec-11 05:23 PM | edited Sat 03-Dec-11 05:27 PM by mikesrc
You might see if you can find a Nikkor 28-200mm 3.5-5.6G. have not been made in a while like 2006 or so. I picked one up a year or so ago and it a mighty fine lens for the money.I gave 250 for mine LNIB papers and all. Go here and take a look.
Another vote for the 18-105 VR. Cheap, sharp, light. Unless you think you need 16mm on the wide end (I doubt it), then I recommend the 16-85 but is much shorter on the long end and much more expensive.
Agree on the 18-105. Mine stays in the bag all the time. If you've got the light, that thing is terrific for the price. Mine paid for itself the first time I used it.. for a real estate shoot. Tack sharp, nice contrast, light. I wouldn't use it for paying work on portraits, but for candids, it's just fine.