View Full Version : Next Lens for D70?
phishphorphun
01-20-2005, 12:19 AM
Okay guys, be patient, this is my first post and I'm kinda new to this digital photography.
I'm the proud owner of a new body D70 purchased last week. I have been using my old Quantaray NF AF 1:4~5.6 35-80mm lens that I bought with my N6006 twelve years ago. I also have a Quantaray AF TEC 10 75-300mm w/macro f4-5.6 I used with the N6006.
I've taken over a thousand "efforts" with some success (my low standards) with the 35-80mm of my fish.
My questions are: Should I get a digital lens now to expedite better results? If yes, which lens would best suit me for primary aquatic photography? Or should I first spend money on a descent flash and use the lens I have? And finally, can I get comparable results with the lens I have compared to a higher aperture len?
i don't understand what you mean by "digital lens". if you have been shooting with a 35-70mm - a good compromise would be to purchase a nikkor 50mm 1.8d. you can pick one up for $90-100 brand new. it is a great little lens and for $100, and for that price, i am willing to overlook the plastic body and filter threads. it is a very sharp lens.
my recommendation is to save up for good glass, and an sb-800 speedlight.
paradise
01-20-2005, 1:12 AM
That lens Hiro recommended is a very nice Aquatic photography lens, due to its 1.8 aperature, lets in tons of light. I use the canon equivalent a LOT specially on quick fish in decent lighting. Can go to very high speeds. Bokeh is a bit weird, but otherwise it's a fine lens. Cost me $70 :)
phishphorphun
01-20-2005, 1:46 AM
i don't understand what you mean by "digital lens". if you have been shooting with a 35-70mm - a good compromise would be to purchase a nikkor 50mm 1.8d. you can pick one up for $90-100 brand new. it is a great little lens and for $100, and for that price, i am willing to overlook the plastic body and filter threads. it is a very sharp lens.
my recommendation is to save up for good glass, and an sb-800 speedlight.
When I say "digital lens" I guess I'm refering to the newer "D-G" specified lenses i have read about. I don't know what you mean when you refer to "good glass". I apologise for not knowing this expression.
turbomkt
01-20-2005, 2:18 AM
When I say "digital lens" I guess I'm refering to the newer "D-G" specified lenses i have read about. I don't know what you mean when you refer to "good glass". I apologise for not knowing this expression.
Good glass is used to refer to a higher quality lens. In particular, I think a crisp picture from edge to edge will be indicative of "good glass." Not sure about the Nikon lenses, but on the Canon side anything designated "L" glass is considered GOOD. :wink:
hey, here's a link that explains the letters.
http://www.bythom.com/lensacronyms.htm
phishphorphun
01-20-2005, 8:34 AM
hey, here's a link that explains the letters.
http://www.bythom.com/lensacronyms.htm
Thanks for the acronym link. I have a better understanding of what the letters mean now.
phishphorphun
01-20-2005, 8:44 AM
You all have been very helpful. I think I'll get the 50mm f 1.8 first and play with that for a while. I'm more interested in saving up for a macro like the 105mm Sigma or 90mm Tamron. I've noticed those two are very popular in many posts and articles I've read. The flash is going to be a whole new venture to research a little later.
paradise
01-20-2005, 12:46 PM
I think that you gotta go slowly. The Macro lenses ( I have the canon equivalent, the 100mm 2.8 macro) are great but they are a totally different beast from the light and easy 50mm lens. they are very heavy, require tripod unless you can still get really high shutter speed, and are really good for closeups or small subjects. A good flash with a controller allows your exsisting set of lenses to shine by giving you a great light source from the top and fixing color temperature problems. I got the lens first, but now I am thinking it would probably be more benefitial to start w/the flash/controller first. But I just had to take pics of my sw nano stuff, which come out great w/the Macro lens.
phishphorphun
01-20-2005, 7:55 PM
I think that you gotta go slowly. The Macro lenses ( I have the canon equivalent, the 100mm 2.8 macro) are great but they are a totally different beast from the light and easy 50mm lens. they are very heavy, require tripod unless you can still get really high shutter speed, and are really good for closeups or small subjects. A good flash with a controller allows your exsisting set of lenses to shine by giving you a great light source from the top and fixing color temperature problems. I got the lens first, but now I am thinking it would probably be more benefitial to start w/the flash/controller first. But I just had to take pics of my sw nano stuff, which come out great w/the Macro lens.
Thanks for thoughtful advice. I am going to go slow, like you suggest. If I understand correctly, the lenses I have and perhaps adding the 50mm f 1.8, can achieve what I'm looking for if I get the proper lighting equipment. Are you suggesting flash that I can setup left, right, or above the tank?
the tamron sp 90 di is very light :) as light as the kit lens at least. but i do agree, a flash should probably come first.