Web
Analytics
Question - - Good Nikon lenses | Kit / Clothing / Equipment | 28DaysLater.co.uk
  • Welcome to 28DaysLater.co.uk - 28DL - The UK Urban Exploring / Urban Exploration / Urbex Forums.

    Asylums and Hospitals, High Stuff, Industrial, Leisure Sites, Residential Sites, Military Sites, Mines and Quarries, ROC Posts, Theatres and Cinemas, Draining, Underground Sites, European and International Sites, Leads, Rumours and News, Kit, Clothing, Equipment, Photography and Video sections, plus Private & Local Groups and a lot more.

    Please feel free to browse this website as a guest. However, creating an account allows you to search, post replies, start new threads, use bookmarking, live chat, messaging and notification systems. Also, it removes some ads.

    Create an account | Login | Request new password

Question - Good Nikon lenses

MattXDA

28DL Member
28DL Member
#1
I currently own a D7100 with the stock 18-105mm kit lens. I've read good things about the Nikon 35mm prime lens for sharpness, and am wondering if I should get one as they're pretty cheap too.
I would like a macro lens too, but they all seem really expensive at £300+.
Which lenses would be a good addition to the 18-105, in terms of sharpness and range?

Thanks!:)
 

Bigian88

The Massive Mancunian
28DL Full Member
#2
35mm and 50mm prime lenses are very sharp BUT prime lenses are a very different photography experience to using a telephoto.

Your DSLR body uses a 1.5x crop sensor so 35mm is actually infact more like 52mm and the 50mm is 75mm. As its a static lens, you cant zoom out if you are too close to get a wide angled shot - you can only walk backwards to re-frame the shot IF the surroundings allow you to do so. The advantage of said lenses are they are fast (a high aperture of f1.8 with the entry level models) which means even in dark conditions they maintain a decent freehand shutter speed so motion blur shouldn't be a factor but depth of field/background blur/bokeh does, which means wide angled shots aren't its strong point. They favor close up shots best with a singular object in focus - much like a portrait.

The usefulness of them all depends on what sort of photos you are looking to take.



TLDR version: They are good for most things but are limited by focal range. Good for portraits, background blurring and are good in low light conditions - they aren't so good for wide angled photos, landscapes or photography in space-limited areas.
 

Muttley

28DL Full Member
28DL Full Member
#6
Yes, you should get a 35mm - best bang for buck there is.

Not great for exploring all the time due to space limitations v lack of zoom, but fantastic for family, pets, flowers, street photography.

The lack of zoom helps make you a better photographer too as it forces you to thing about your composure.
 

Adders

living in a cold world
Regular User
#7
At the moment I take a Samyang 8mm and a Nikon 35mm with me, and the 35mm mostly only comes out for detail shots. It's definitely worth the small amount of money you can pick one up for.

Take a look at the Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 lens. Very reasonable and arguably the best wide angle zoom you can get. I've been after one of these for years, but I mostly believe in prime lenses.

I've never seen anyone effectively use a telephoto lens whilst exploring, so ignore anything longer than a 50mm. A macro lens is also questionably useless for this lark, so unless you want to take photos of flowers in your spare time it's maybe best to move on. There are companies around that rent out lenses, so if you're really not sure then perhaps look into borrowing one first to see how you get on with it.
 

Similar threads