for my next lens

[piperknitsRN]

I really have to slam on the brakes for now with buying new lenses--especially since I'm still learning with the ones I already have (and oh boy, what a learning curve it is!). But, I still like to dream. I know lenses are quite individual to what you like to take pictures of and my specific needs wouldn't necessarily drive someone else's purchase. I like to take pictures of stuff I see when out on walks, but I live in a larger city where my safety is of some concern (almost makes me want to go back to a more unobstrusive point and shoot for those purposes) and I still feel a little odd/like a mugging risk with my camera, so I try to be careful when I'm out and about. It's just harder to blend into the background when you have this larger-than-usual camera hanging around your neck.

But, for the purposes of taking pictures of bunnies (who are often doing adorably cute things at a distance--at least, mine seem to) I'm thinking telephoto zoom lens... but I don't want to pay an arm and a leg (I'm on a budget--at least, when I'm being sensible about it, I am!). What would be some good choices (and maybe I'm wrong about the type of lens I'm interested in) that won't break the bank?

 

[OneTwoThree]

Lenses and budget don't really go hand in hand, unfortunately. If you get an off brand Tamron or Sigma the price (and unfortunately quality as well) is less. An 18-200 is said to be a nice lens, I have an 18-105mm 3.5 that I like. Your primes will be your sharpest lenses though, and the 1.8 will come in handy in lower light. You can get a really nice telefoto lenses with 2.8 like the 70-200mm, but its about...$2400

 

[MikeScone]

If you're looking for something longer, there is a companion kit lens to the 18-55mm zoom you have, a 55-200mm. It comes in VR and non-VR versions, and I'd get the VR version. Adorama's got it on sale right now for only $146 (after a $100 instant rebate), which is a bargain - see http://www.adorama.com/NK55200VRU.html. That would give you the 18-200mm range in two lenses. For $100 more, you can get a 55-300mm and run the range all the way up to 300mm, which is the equivalent of a 450mm in 35mm terms. (See this thread for examples of different focal lengths).

There's also a 70-300mm VR. I have one, and like it very much. The gap between 55 and 70mm is not an issue, really, but that lens is significantly more expensive than the 55-200mm or 55-300mm - $400 in refurb form, closer to $600 new. Given the option, I'd probably go with the 55-300mm now (it's a new lens, not available when I got my 70-300VR).

You could cover the 18-200mm range in one lens, which I also have - again, it's much more expensive, $850 more or less.

 

[piperknitsRN]

Mike: Oh, options, options! Wow... I might just have to get that 55-200mm lens... So cheap! Wow. Amazing... so many options.... Thanks!

MikeScone wrote:

If you're looking for something longer, there is a companion kit lens to the 18-55mm zoom you have, a 55-200mm. It comes in VR and non-VR versions, and I'd get the VR version. Adorama's got it on sale right now for only $146 (after a $100 instant rebate), which is a bargain - see http://www.adorama.com/NK55200VRU.html. That would give you the 18-200mm range in two lenses. For $100 more, you can get a 55-300mm and run the range all the way up to 300mm, which is the equivalent of a 450mm in 35mm terms. (See this thread for examples of different focal lengths).

There's also a 70-300mm VR. I have one, and like it very much. The gap between 55 and 70mm is not an issue, really, but that lens is significantly more expensive than the 55-200mm or 55-300mm - $400 in refurb form, closer to $600 new. Given the option, I'd probably go with the 55-300mm now (it's a new lens, not available when I got my 70-300VR).

You could cover the 18-200mm range in one lens, which I also have - again, it's much more expensive, $850 more or less.

 

[piperknitsRN]

OneTwoThree wrote:

Lenses and budget don't really go hand in hand, unfortunately. If you get an off brand Tamron or Sigma the price (and unfortunately quality as well) is less. An 18-200 is said to be a nice lens, I have an 18-105mm 3.5 that I like. Your primes will be your sharpest lenses though, and the 1.8 will come in handy in lower light. You can get a really nice telefoto lenses with 2.8 like the 70-200mm, but its about...$2400

Only $2400? Chunk change! (Ha ha. I wish.) :biggrin2:

 

[OneTwoThree]

piperknitsRN wrote:

OneTwoThree wrote:

Lenses and budget don't really go hand in hand, unfortunately. If you get an off brand Tamron or Sigma the price (and unfortunately quality as well) is less. An 18-200 is said to be a nice lens, I have an 18-105mm 3.5 that I like. Your primes will be your sharpest lenses though, and the 1.8 will come in handy in lower light. You can get a really nice telefoto lenses with 2.8 like the 70-200mm, but its about...$2400

Only $2400? Chunk change! (Ha ha. I wish.) :biggrin2:

Haha I know right? It's my dream lens <3

 

[piperknitsRN]

OneTwoThree wrote:

piperknitsRN wrote:

OneTwoThree wrote:

Lenses and budget don't really go hand in hand, unfortunately. If you get an off brand Tamron or Sigma the price (and unfortunately quality as well) is less. An 18-200 is said to be a nice lens, I have an 18-105mm 3.5 that I like. Your primes will be your sharpest lenses though, and the 1.8 will come in handy in lower light. You can get a really nice telefoto lenses with 2.8 like the 70-200mm, but its about...$2400

Only $2400? Chunk change! (Ha ha. I wish.) :biggrin2:

Haha I know right? It's my dream lens <3

Well, one day, when I win the lottery, I plan to buy that lens ;-). 2.8 on a 70-200mm would be <<amazing>>.

I got my UV filter for my 50mm prime and so I played around with it this evening and I think I like it better than the 35mm prime... can't say why that would be, though, at this point.

I like the prime lenses in general, though it does mean I have to move around a fair bit--but that doesn't really bother me either, since this whole photography thing is so new to me, I don't really know any better, I guess. Tomorrow I may take the camera out into the U district (not the safest of places, but in broad daylight, I lull myself into a false sense of security) and try to get some pictures on the street. I have to be careful, but I got some fun snapshots in my neighborhood a few days ago, using just the kit lens (it was a sunny day).