Red Bull Unrailistic | LIVE Broadcast

Member of the Month

PartyBullshiit
March, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

D90 help

profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
Hey everyone,

I'm upgrading my nikon d60 to a d90 in a couple of weeks. I have a 18-55mm and a 55-200mm lens that I am going to keep, but does anybody have any suggestions about a new lens for cheap. Not necessarily nikon but sigma, tamrom ect. Should I buy it with the 18-105 kit?

So if anybody has suggestions about a solid lens for shooting landscapes, long exposure and sports (mostly skiing, wakeboarding and mtb)

And if there is any interest in buying my d60 (1.5 years old) 9/10. orig boxes, carrying bag, charger, battery, manuel. (would consider selling the 18-55 with it too.) pm me if there is any interest.
Jun 26 2010 6:39PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61107 - Karma: 118,282
50 1.8
Jun 26 2010 7:14PM
0 0
profile picture
Ethan.G
Posts: 1166 - Karma: 465
this, I need to get this one too. been meaning to for a while for my d90
Jun 26 2010 7:21PM
0 0
profile picture
207
Posts: 8969 - Karma: 3,846
Get a Tokina 12-24 wide angle lense. Its SO BEAST for only $450.
Jun 26 2010 7:26PM
0 0
profile picture
basedjase
Posts: 2510 - Karma: 640
IMO, Tokina 11-16 is better. sharper and much higher contrast.
Jun 26 2010 7:34PM
0 0
profile picture
207
Posts: 8969 - Karma: 3,846
Yeah I knew that all along, but just until now I thought it was Canon only. Not sure why, I'm probably 99% retarded.
Jun 26 2010 7:37PM
0 0
profile picture
IanAvery-Leaf
Posts: 9926 - Karma: 9,344
its really nice but not that wide on a crop sensor
Jun 26 2010 7:39PM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
so what do you get in comparison between the 11-16 and the 50 as far as quality and versatility?
Jun 26 2010 7:40PM
0 0
profile picture
207
Posts: 8969 - Karma: 3,846
Click for larger image

Thats a tokina 12-24^

I want it so bad.
ahsdfaskdfhkasdhfkajsdfkadsfkasdfk
Jun 26 2010 7:40PM
0 0
profile picture
207
Posts: 8969 - Karma: 3,846
Tokina 11-16

Click for larger image

Nikon 50 1/8


Click for larger image

Tokina=wide angle lense, semi-expensive, great for shooting up close action, or panorama.

Nikon 50 1/8. Great for eerie exposures and such.

Jun 26 2010 7:45PM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
so I just read some reviews and watched some videos about this lens, and it said it was a great lens for, but it shoots like a 75mm on a dx body, so it is not very good for a wide angle and you will have to stand far away. Are you shooting with this on a dx? if so are you finding this annoying?
Jun 26 2010 7:53PM
0 0
profile picture
hollygrove
Posts: 7845 - Karma: 93
look through the lens and take what you get. doesn't matter how wide or how long your lens is. thats whole beauty of non-zooms - you get the opportunity to move around and really compose the shot. the 50 1.8 is cheap, suprisingly good quality, and a big bang for the buck.
Jun 26 2010 11:35PM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
Thanks for all the help so far guys. I have been reading more reviews about the nikon 50 1.8. Everybody seems to love it. So I will have to see if I can try it out at a shop.

Also, does anybody know about the 18-105 kit lens that comes with the d90? I was just wondering if I should sell my 18-55 with the d60 it the 18-105 covers the range well enough, but I have read that the 18-105 has some distortion close up and it also focuses minimum 17inches from the subject where as the 18-55 focuses as close as 10 inches. So seeing as I will don't have the budget to invest in an intricate lineup of lenses, do I lose anything by getting rid of the 18-55 or should I keep it along with getting the 18-105?
Jun 26 2010 11:50PM
0 0
profile picture
.jr
Posts: 5313 - Karma: 356
You know what? Ill be the first to say it, you nifty fifty fuckers can go fuck off.

I got the 50 1.8 af-d about two weeks ago and I hate it. Bokeh looks like shit, and its too long. Makes me regret not opting for the 35mm f/2 af-d.

Side note, fuck dx g lenses as well.
Second side note, MF 50 1.8s on film cameras is the only way to go.
Jun 27 2010 12:57AM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
35 also got great reviews. what do people think of the two compared?

bump

Jun 27 2010 11:26PM
0 0
profile picture
benk
Posts: 1342 - Karma: 988
I really like my 50 1.8 and havent tried the 35mm prime but give them both a shot. I really like my sigma 17-70mm. use it 75% of the time with my D90.

almost all my top photos have come from my 10.5mm fisheye but its a very select lens.

go with the 50mm cause its cheap and very sharp but I have only used it skiing once. 
Jun 28 2010 12:34AM
0 0
profile picture
Rob_G
Posts: 816 - Karma: 2,367

I Have a D90 with the 18-105, 50mm 1,8 and 10,5mm. The 18-105 has good versatility but lacks in quality, it's fine but compared to the 50mm it just isn't as sharp.

Everyone should have a 50mm or 35mm in their setup like others say it's cheap and have great quality. And you can use it in skiing if you take the time to find angles and stay stationary (alittle more serious than snapping shots with a wideangle)

I can highly recommend the 10,5mm 2,8 fisheye it's super sharp and fun to experiment with. It can be a bit pricy but it's well worth it! You can find pretty cheap used ones, I got mine in perfect condition for 645$

Jun 28 2010 5:17AM
0 0
profile picture
icantskiiFILM
Posts: 2113 - Karma: 140
its SOOOOo sharp. and only 120. its like THE lens that almost every photographer should get
Jun 28 2010 11:25AM
0 0
profile picture
icantskiiFILM
Posts: 2113 - Karma: 140
whatever it says..a 50mm lens is the same focal length of the human eye so you can get a feel for waht it will be like
Jun 28 2010 12:44PM
0 0
profile picture
Deezy
Posts: 4580 - Karma: 1,004
35 2.0

primes are cheap.
not sealed. but nor is ur D90.

the 50 on a DX is to tight



that is all.
Jun 28 2010 12:47PM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
So right now this is what I am thinking for my setup.

d90
18-105mm
50mm
55-200mm (already have)
250-500mm (already have)

Should I keep my 18-55? I have heard the quality is actually a little better then the 18-105? Or I could sell it with my d60 to get a couple extra bucks.

Also does anybody know about the nikon grip for the d90? Is it worth $150?
Jun 28 2010 12:49PM
0 0
profile picture
PeterWojnar
Posts: 3937 - Karma: 678
I am going to return the T1i that my parents gifted me recently and score the deal where they buy me a body and I buy me lenses. The T1i is good, but it is being extremely annoying in the little things...

I'll go with the D90 body and I will get the 50mm 1.4, not the 1.8. I already have an old 35-135 3.5-4.5, and I'll get the 50 to supplement that. (I already have it from my moms old nikon film camera. It's AF but I don't know if it'll work with the D90)

Anyways, do you think it's worth the money to get the 1.4 over the 1.8? I think the quality of the lens and the AF speed should make up the cost easily, and the wider aperture will be a bonus. Then I might add the 35mm 1.8 later and after that get a wide Tokina. Opinions?





Sorry to thread jack, but since the topic is so close and everybody already has it in their threads...
Jun 28 2010 1:01PM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
is it worth it to get the 35 and the 50? or would you want to do something like get the cheaper 50 and then get the 10.5 fisheye like people have recommended. I think I am going to get the cheaper 50 and then save up for the fisheye for the ski season.
Jun 28 2010 1:07PM
0 0
profile picture
PeterWojnar
Posts: 3937 - Karma: 678
Maybe it is worth it... I've still got a few weeks to decide, so I don't know. I've heard that the cheaper 50 has CA issues and is soft below f/2.8 though... I don't know.
Jun 28 2010 1:16PM
0 0
profile picture
LC.
Posts: 5952 - Karma: 2,423
Don't buy any new lenses yet. That 18-105 or whatever isn't an upgrade from what you've got. Shoot with what you have just now until you can afford some nice lenses, and in the meantime you'll find out what lengths you like the most.
Jun 28 2010 1:28PM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
is it a downgrade though? because I'm not sure people will buy my d60 without a lens. What lens do you recommend I save up for? I just want something that will be a good all around lens for all types of shooting.
Jun 28 2010 1:54PM
0 0
profile picture
Jordan
Posts: 4079 - Karma: 2,122
70-200mm f/2.8 VR

is a good lens to save up for

or you can get an older 80-200mm f/2.8 for a little cheaper but they really hold their value.

Hands down the best all around lens for portraits, sports, indoor shooting etc....
Jun 28 2010 2:13PM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
alright, it will probably be a while before I can save up for that though. haha. is that what you mostly shoot with? your shots are amazing btw.
Jun 28 2010 2:23PM
0 0
profile picture
LC.
Posts: 5952 - Karma: 2,423
I don't know in depth about those lenses but they're all pretty average so you'd be losing money by selling & buying. Better just to save it. Good lenses depend on what's good for YOU so just shoot with the zooms you have which cover all lengths and see what length you like or if you find yourself wanting faster lenses.

People will buy a D60 body on its own.

Ultimately a 70-200 or 80-200 2.8 is what you'll end up wanting for ski shots but that's big bucks (80-200 is just as good by the way). The 70-300 is meant to be decent. There's a good chance of a 70-200 f4 coming out in the next year which would be sick. I like a 50mm but some people don't, it's preference. Same with 35mm. 10-24 and 12-24 are good options for wide zooms.
Jun 28 2010 2:36PM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
ok, thanks for all the help. what are the risks of buying a used lens. If I wanted to buy the 80-200 now or in the next few months, would it be a risk to buy it used?
Jun 28 2010 2:41PM
0 0
profile picture
Jordan
Posts: 4079 - Karma: 2,122
Thanks man!

Yeah I use a 70-200mm f/2.8 for a lot of my shots - its a great lens.

I also use my 12-24 f/4 a lot and then the 10.5 f/2.8 fisheye too


Invest in glass not bodies, because lenses hold their value so much better.

I also love shooting with older lenses, I have a 50 f/1.4 that's hella old but makes some sick pictures like this: Click for larger image


Its a baller lens that you can get pretty cheap


Jun 28 2010 2:57PM
0 0
profile picture
Deezy
Posts: 4580 - Karma: 1,004
little tip for you... with your consumer grade lenses... NEVER shoot at max apertures. for best results shoot at f/8 all the time. ((any higher u get defraction, any lower u get CA))

you can shoot however you like. just f/8 gives less lawed results

Jun 28 2010 5:16PM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
yeah, I know glass before body, but the d60 was my first camera and its time for an upgrade. plus i like the hd video feature of the d90, hopefully it will last me a while.
Jun 28 2010 5:17PM
0 0
profile picture
Jordan
Posts: 4079 - Karma: 2,122
Oh no! I didn't mean it like that - I just always say that to people buying cameras.

Yeah the D90 is a great camera, it's suposed to better than my D200 haha!


But yep yep, the d90 will be a good camera and then go get yo glass on!
Jun 28 2010 6:41PM
0 0
profile picture
icantskiiFILM
Posts: 2113 - Karma: 140
thats so indie
Jun 28 2010 7:50PM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
his pictures are sick. look at his website.
Jun 28 2010 8:07PM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
nighttime bump
Jun 28 2010 10:22PM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
Is anybody interested in buying my d60? Check out my thread for more info.

bump
Jun 29 2010 8:44PM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
bump
Jul 1 2010 8:12PM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
bump
Jul 2 2010 11:20PM
0 0
profile picture
.jr
Posts: 5313 - Karma: 356
why are you bumping this.
Jul 3 2010 10:39AM
0 0
profile picture
icantskiiFILM
Posts: 2113 - Karma: 140
you just bumped it again!!!
Jul 3 2010 12:20PM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
to see if anyone else has a lens suggestion...
Jul 3 2010 11:07PM
0 0
profile picture
PeterWojnar
Posts: 3937 - Karma: 678
I'd like to hear more as well... I went to Costco and returned the T1i (Love costco, they took it back with almost 5,000 clicks on the shutter)

I'm going to order a D90 body this week, and I'll still need to decide on lens options.
Jul 18 2010 5:41PM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
before you do, you might want to consider waiting because nikon is set to release a new d90 in a couple of weeks (hopefully). Check out this site.

http://nikonrumors.com/
Jul 18 2010 9:11PM
0 0
profile picture
IanAvery-Leaf
Posts: 9926 - Karma: 9,344
I later realized this is horrible wrong and forgot to post

the 11-16 is a lens meant for crop, so its plenty wide

sorry for the wrong info
Jul 18 2010 9:46PM
0 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,385
fuck the 18-105. I really hate that lens. There's really no reason to buy a shit lens if you are at all interested in keeping your photo gear around for a while.
Jul 18 2010 10:40PM
0 0
profile picture
ngates_EC
Posts: 1464 - Karma: 807
what do you recommend if money is an issue? I could spend up to $500-600 if I will get a good zoom lens. I am going to get a 50mm 1.8, but I think I want a zoom lens too for general use.
Jul 18 2010 11:17PM
0 0
profile picture
icantskiiFILM
Posts: 2113 - Karma: 140
lol i knew u were gna comment with this. its seriously like the BEST lens ever for the price. by far my fav lens
Jul 18 2010 11:27PM
0 0
profile picture
PeterWojnar
Posts: 3937 - Karma: 678
very interesting... but I already ordered today. B&H has a 15 day return though... I think I'll stick with the D90, because these are really just rumors for the moment. If Nikon says somehting before time's up (it's 15 days from arrival, not ordering) I'll consider returning it in favour of the new one. That said, it'd probably cost a little more than $900 in its first few months.
Jul 19 2010 12:24AM
0 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,385
The 18-55 that you have is actually a good lens. It has good color rendition, it's very sharp (much sharper than the 18-105). The only thing that it suffers from is some barrel distortion, and whatever the aperture limits you to, which isn't much. I think a little bit of distortion, depending on your subject feels more natural in wide angle lenses. Just not for buildings.

So keep that. If you want another midrange zoom for cheap, buy the Nikon 28-80mm f/3.3-5.6G. People are going to laugh at that one - but it's the same thing, it works rediculously well and you can get it for less than 100 bucks. It flares a little bit (but i like flares), it distorts (which is easy to fix) and it's not very fast (which is the biggest limiting factor), but you are getting a lot more than you are paying for. It's pretty much sharp at all apertures and focal lengths, and super light so you can add it to your camera bag for a hike without worrying about weight. And, if it breaks, you're out less than 100. Just don't get the silver one, that's embarrassing.

that gets you through most of your focal lengths. then start saving up for some real glass. the 50 f1.8 is a good place to start to give some low light ability, as is the 35mm f2 which are both pretty cheap. The older 80-200 f2.8 is great for ski photography and cheaper than the newer 70-200 f2.8. Start reading about lenses and you will discover that there are so many options, all the way back to older manual focus lenses that you would have never heard about if you hadn't really researched it.



Jul 19 2010 4:18AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)