Essential lenses?

deductress

deductress

Messages
136
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello,
I would appreciate advice from experienced photographers on lenses they feel are essential for any photographer hoping to move into the professional field.
I currently own a Nikon D3200, along with your basic 18-55mm 1.3-5.6G and a Nikkor 40mm 1:2.8G. Today i'm planning to invest in a Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G also.
So far i've only practiced with landscape, botany and architecture photography, however i would like to make the move into casual portraiture. Specificially i'm hoping to build up a portfolio on farming, as in the workers, machinery and animals. So really i'm seeking more generalised adaptable lenses.
(I'm also seeking advice on lenses best suited to wildlife photography?)

If i've missed any details which are required to better advise me, please do ask.

Thank you for all and any help given.
 
With wildlife lenses, it really depends on what you want to take and how close you can get, also how much you are willing to budget. The lens could range from a 70-200, 70-300, 150-600 to the long heavy prime lenses and the cost increases with each. Even on a budget you still taking near the grand or just over for a 500/600mm lens. The budget lenses are great, but they go have their limitation, ie low light performance, soft wide open, unfortunately you do get what you pay for in most cases.
 
There really isn't any such thing as an essential lens all you need to be pro is a camera a lens and most importantly a customer! You could make money with your current setup or you could spend ten grand in kit and make no money. Kit doesn't make you a pro, good planning, marketing and delivery make a pro.
 
Buy the 50mm and stick with what you have for a while, apart from birding you can shoot everything you've mentioned without buying anything else. There are a few general purpose, high quality pro lenses, such as the 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200, but they will cost you many thousands of pounds to purchase.
 
Last edited:
pete.rush said:
With wildlife lenses, it really depends on what you want to take and how close you can get, also how much you are willing to budget. The lens could range from a 70-200, 70-300, 150-600 to the long heavy prime lenses and the cost increases with each. Even on a budget you still taking near the grand or just over for a 500/600mm lens. The budget lenses are great, but they go have their limitation, ie low light performance, soft wide open, unfortunately you do get what you pay for in most cases.
Click to expand...

Yes i've been considering a 70-200, but the prices kinda make me want to faint. What brand do you feel is safest for these types of lens? I am aware of Nikkor, Tamron and of course Nikon, but am unsure of other safe, quality brands.
Ideally it would be farm animals, or birds. It would be both distant and close, i'm lucky to have the ability to have so many animals so close to me.
In terms of budget, the most i could part with at this point would be £500.

Thank you for your help.
 
a1ex2001 said:
There really isn't any such thing as an essential lens all you need to be pro is a camera a lens and most importantly a customer! You could make money with your current setup or you could spend ten grand in kit and make no money. Kit doesn't make you a pro, good planning, marketing and delivery make a pro.
Click to expand...

True, i do already sell landscape prints, but only on a very small scale. I feel if i varied my field of work (e.g. moving into portraits) and used more differing lens it might help me widen my attraction to more customers.
Thank you.
 
psenior1 said:
Buy the 50mm and stick with what you have for a while, apart from birding you can shoot everything you've mentioned without buying anything else. There are a few general purpose, high quality pro lenses, such as the 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200, but they will cost you many thousands of pounds to purchase.
Click to expand...

Yes i've been looking at both 14-24 and 70-200, and both of their prices have been overwhelming me. XD
Thank you for your advice.
 
deductress said:
Yes i've been looking at both 14-24 and 70-200, and both of their prices have been overwhelming me. XD
Thank you for your advice.
Click to expand...

unfortunately you have to pay to play, as with any profession (or even hobby), though there are some good bargains to be had from the likes of Sigma and Tamron (Nikkor is Nikon ;)).

Buy new lenses when you find what you have is holding you back, be it IQ or focal length, rather in the hope that it will make you better or help you sell more. If you're ever in any doubt how good your current kit is, just search on 500px or Flickr.
 
Last edited:
As a contrary opinion, the 50mm is generally a very poor lens for use on an APS-C sensor camera - it has a tendency to be both too narrow and too wide at the same time. It's only redeeming feature is that 50/1.8 lenses are cheap enough for most systems to come free with a packet of cornflakes. Most people buy a nifty fifty just because it's cheap and for no other reason.

Something a little longer, between 60mm and 105mm is generally most useful for portraits.

But, lens choice is a personal thing and it's a matter of finding the lenses that work for you and compliment your style.
 
deductress said:
Hello,
I would appreciate advice from experienced photographers on lenses they feel are essential for any photographer hoping to move into the professional field.
I currently own a Nikon D3200, along with your basic 18-55mm 1.3-5.6G and a Nikkor 40mm 1:2.8G. Today i'm planning to invest in a Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G also.
So far i've only practiced with landscape, botany and architecture photography, however i would like to make the move into casual portraiture. Specificially i'm hoping to build up a portfolio on farming, as in the workers, machinery and animals. So really i'm seeking more generalised adaptable lenses.
(I'm also seeking advice on lenses best suited to wildlife photography?)

If i've missed any details which are required to better advise me, please do ask.

Thank you for all and any help given.
Click to expand...

The 50/1.8 will be handy for close-ish portraits, nice with out-of-focus backgrounds at low f/numbers around f/1.8-2.8. If you use it at mid-range apertures, it'll be no different to your 18-55 and a lot less versatile.

What you're missing is a super-wide (10-20mm-ish for landscapes/architecture etc) and a longer focal length. From what you've said, I'd recommend the Tamron 70-300 VC - good lens, great value, and very versatile range. It's very close in performance to the similar spec Nikon, but that's gone up in price recently to over £400, whereas the Tamron has come down to £240 (y) http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/...n-70-300mm-f4-5.6-SP-Di-VC-USD-Nikon-Fit-Lens
 
psenior1 said:
unfortunately you have to pay to play, as with any profession (or even hobby), though there are some good bargains to be had from the likes of Sigma and Tamron (Nikkor is Nikon ;)).

Buy new lenses when you find what you have is holding you back, be it IQ or focal length, rather in the hope that it will make you better or help you sell more. If you're ever in any doubt how good your current kit is, just search on 500px or Flickr.
Click to expand...

I have felt my current lenses are limiting me. My macro lens is perfect for my botany work, but whenever i take images of people (on my kit lens) the photos just seem... amateur is the best word for it really. So think it's about time i started updating to more specific lens i suppose.
Thanks again!
 
Alastair said:
As a contrary opinion, the 50mm is generally a very poor lens for use on an APS-C sensor camera - it has a tendency to be both too narrow and too wide at the same time. It's only redeeming feature is that 50/1.8 lenses are cheap enough for most systems to come free with a packet of cornflakes. Most people buy a nifty fifty just because it's cheap and for no other reason.

Something a little longer, between 60mm and 105mm is generally most useful for portraits.

But, lens choice is a personal thing and it's a matter of finding the lenses that work for you and compliment your style.
Click to expand...

I'll certainly have a look at some 60mms then, thank you.
 
HoppyUK said:
The 50/1.8 will be handy for close-ish portraits, nice with out-of-focus backgrounds at low f/numbers around f/1.8-2.8. If you use it at mid-range apertures, it'll be no different to your 18-55 and a lot less versatile.

What you're missing is a super-wide (10-20mm-ish for landscapes/architecture etc) and a longer focal length. From what you've said, I'd recommend the Tamron 70-300 VC - good lens, great value, and very versatile range. It's very close in performance to the similar spec Nikon, but that's gone up in price recently to over £400, whereas the Tamron has come down to £240 (y) http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/...n-70-300mm-f4-5.6-SP-Di-VC-USD-Nikon-Fit-Lens
Click to expand...

Perfect, i appreciate references to specific lenses, thank you very much! I have been considering a 70-200, but the price was a bit much for me. This suits a bit more acceptably. Thank you.

EDIT: Would that lens fit my D3200? Excuse my ignorance, but am i right in saying D3200s tend to only work with AF-S lenses, and this looks like it may be a AF? Forgive me if i'm mistaken.
 
Last edited:
deductress said:
...
EDIT: Would that lens fit my D3200? Excuse my ignorance, but am i right in saying D3200s tend to only work with AF-S lenses, and this looks like it may be a AF? Forgive me if i'm mistaken.
Click to expand...
Yes, Tamron's name for af-s is USD, Sigma's is HSM.
 
Hi

Away from the off topic comments....

Portraiture wise....the 50mm is ok on a crop sensor. The nikkor 85 f1.8 is a great lens for portraiture.

I did a bit of portraiture with the d90

I had a tamron 17-50 f2.8 which is a brilliant lens. Much better than the kit lens and can be had cheaply second hand.

I also had a sigma 70-200 f2.8 on the d90 which was great value for the money.

The thing that ultimately made my portraits better was not new lenses but

A) understanding and using light better

B) interacting better with the subjects

Hope that helps

Shaheed
 
deductress said:
... whenever i take images of people (on my kit lens) the photos just seem... amateur is the best word for it really.
Click to expand...
Of course I'm taking a wild guess since I haven't seen any of your work, but to my mind it's quite unlikely that the lens is the cause of this. Composition, posing, lighting and post processing are likely to have a much more significant impact.

Just about the only area where the lens will help is in throwing the background out of focus. But your 50mm f/1.8 will do that for you.
 
Sir SR said:
Hi

Away from the off topic comments....

Portraiture wise....the 50mm is ok on a crop sensor. The nikkor 85 f1.8 is a great lens for portraiture.

I did a bit of portraiture with the d90

I had a tamron 17-50 f2.8 which is a brilliant lens. Much better than the kit lens and can be had cheaply second hand.

I also had a sigma 70-200 f2.8 on the d90 which was great value for the money.

The thing that ultimately made my portraits better was not new lenses but

A) understanding and using light better

B) interacting better with the subjects

Hope that helps

Shaheed
Click to expand...

Awesome, thank you for the advice and recommendations! Yes it seems i need to get a much better grasp on using light more than anything first.
 
Sir SR said:
I had a tamron 17-50 f2.8 which is a brilliant lens. Much better than the kit lens and can be had cheaply second hand.
Click to expand...

I can second that all be it on the canon - They come in two flavours VC and non VC (Vibration control - the same thing as OS on the sigma and VR on nikon /IS on canon) - I got my non VC one from the classifieds here for sub £200. IRRC VC are about £75 more (second hand)
 
tother thing might be worth mentioning is that if you can't aford a 70-200 f2.8 (Sigma with HSM at about £399 second hand is probably as cheap as that gets unless you get very lucky on ebay) Its worth looking at the 70-200 f4 (again you'll need to buy second hand if on a budget)

Although tbh i'm not convinced that the 70-200 is the best lens for you anyway .. I use mine a lot for weddings (both from the back of the church and for candids at receptions), but IMO its a bit long for formal portraits whilst being too short for a lot of wildlife work.

Personally I'd say you might be better off with an 85mm f1.8 prime for portraits and saving up to get a longer lens for wildlife ( I have the sigma 150-500 OS which is about £700 new). Alternately you could do worse than the tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro , which is a cracking macro lens and also still good for portraits
 
Last edited:
big soft moose said:
tother thing might be worth mentioning is that if you can't aford a 70-200 f2.8 (Sigma with HSM at about £399 second hand is probably as cheap as that gets unless you get very lucky on ebay) Its worth looking at the 70-200 f4 (again you'll need to buy second hand if on a budget)

Although tbh i'm not convinced that the 70-200 is the best lens for you anyway .. I use mine a lot for weddings (both from the back of the church and for candids at receptions), but IMO its a bit long for formal portraits whilst being too short for a lot of wildlife work.

Personally I'd say you might be better off with an 85mm f1.8 prime for portraits and saving up to get a longer lens for wildlife ( I have the sigma 150-500 OS which is about £700 new). Alternately you could do worse than the tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro , which is a cracking macro lens and also still good for portraits
Click to expand...

Thanks so much for the recommendations, added them all to my wishlist. Quite a few people have mentioned the 85mm to me now, so i feel that should probably be my first major purchase. Thanks for all your help.
 
deductress said:
Thanks so much for the recommendations, added them all to my wishlist. Quite a few people have mentioned the 85mm to me now, so i feel that should probably be my first major purchase. Thanks for all your help.
Click to expand...

Nikon one is about 375 new or 200 second hand - the Sigma f1.4 may also be worth a look , as although it costs more the price of a new nikon will get you one second hand (again the sigma is an HSM lens andthus will be fine on your camera)
 
A focal length of 24mm,50mm and 85mm won't see you far wrong. The faster lens you can get the better for low light and greater shutter speed. ultimately it does come down to a budget.
 
deductress said:
Yes i've been considering a 70-200, but the prices kinda make me want to faint. What brand do you feel is safest for these types of lens? I am aware of Nikkor, Tamron and of course Nikon, but am unsure of other safe, quality brands.
Ideally it would be farm animals, or birds. It would be both distant and close, i'm lucky to have the ability to have so many animals so close to me.
In terms of budget, the most i could part with at this point would be £500.

Thank you for your help.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately distance can be very expensive. The 70-200mm a great lens, you could look at the sigma version, and to make your £ go a bit further, you could look at second hand gear. With you budget I would definitely recommend looking at used equipment, have a look in the for sale forum here, or reputable dealers include mpb photographic, ffordes, mifsuds, camtech, park cameras, digital depot. Others include WEX and London camera exchange, but get an idea of what you want before buying and you could do that by hiring a lens or 2 to try them out before committing the cash
 
pete.rush said:
Unfortunately distance can be very expensive. The 70-200mm a great lens, you could look at the sigma version, and to make your £ go a bit further, you could look at second hand gear. With you budget I would definitely recommend looking at used equipment, have a look in the for sale forum here, or reputable dealers include mpb photographic, ffordes, mifsuds, camtech, park cameras, digital depot. Others include WEX and London camera exchange, but get an idea of what you want before buying and you could do that by hiring a lens or 2 to try them out before committing the cash
Click to expand...

So there's a term i've never heard in reference to cameras - you can hire lenses?
Also thanks for the named dealers - i've been anxious to buy any lenses outside of Amazon and this website.
 
I would say my essential lens are an say 24-70/80 at F2.8 on FF,I can cover a lot with one of these,then I like a couple of fast lens one wide angle a standard,and a short telearound the F 1.4/ F 1.8 range.

Then after this I have some longer tele but not used as often,so I tend to go for an cheaper ones.

:)
 
Another option..
Sell your 40mm macro and buy either the sigma/Nikon 105mm macro or the sigma 150mm macro or as mentioned earlier, the tamron 90mm. You can then also use these for portraits.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all the responses guys! Noting down all recommendations, suggestions and advice. I'm really appreciative of all your help.
 
TCR4x4 said:
Another option..
Sell your 40mm macro and buy either the sigma/Nikon 105mm macro or the sigma 150mm macro or as mentioned earlier, the tamron 90mm. You can then also use these for portraits.
Click to expand...

May consider those lenses, but won't sell my current macro, love it too much! XD
 
Just looking at what you have and what you want to do, if it was me I'd not buy the 50mm and I'd sell the 40mm as well as the 18-55, which whilst a competent lens there are better for not much money. I'd then replace the 40mm macro with the Tamron 60mm f2 macro, this will give you three things over the 40, faster aperture (better to isolate backgrounds and low light use), better working distance and will double as a fast short tele, which is good for portraits. I'd replace the kit lens with something like the Tamron or sigma 17/18-50 f2.8, both do one with built in motors so will autofocus on your D3200. You wouldn't need a 50mm lens then. I'd also consider either Tamron 70-300 or the Nikkor 70-300 for reach, finally when funds permit you could get something like the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 for a wider perspective (great for landscapes).
 
if you wanted to try 60mm you could get the holga lens off ebay, thats 60mm and a interesting asthetic, and you can modify it with a drill to widen apature, but lose sharpness

under a tenner :)
 
PaulButler said:
Just looking at what you have and what you want to do, if it was me I'd not buy the 50mm and I'd sell the 40mm as well as the 18-55, which whilst a competent lens there are better for not much money. I'd then replace the 40mm macro with the Tamron 60mm f2 macro, this will give you three things over the 40, faster aperture (better to isolate backgrounds and low light use), better working distance and will double as a fast short tele, which is good for portraits. I'd replace the kit lens with something like the Tamron or sigma 17/18-50 f2.8, both do one with built in motors so will autofocus on your D3200. You wouldn't need a 50mm lens then. I'd also consider either Tamron 70-300 or the Nikkor 70-300 for reach, finally when funds permit you could get something like the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 for a wider perspective (great for landscapes).
Click to expand...

Already bought the 50mm, so too late for that. XD
I've added your recommendations to my wishlist, but i'm not ready to sell any lenses i have. I'd rather build up on what i have, and then when i'm comfortable using my newer lenses, i'll consider selling my older ones.
Thank you for all your help.
 
pingu666 said:
if you wanted to try 60mm you could get the holga lens off ebay, thats 60mm and a interesting asthetic, and you can modify it with a drill to widen apature, but lose sharpness

under a tenner :)
Click to expand...

Would anyone else second this? I don't tend to like buying electronics off ebay, certainly for so cheap.
 
deductress said:
Also could anyone help me and tell me if this is AF-S and would work with my D3200?
It doesn't say AF-S, but every time i put it in search this comes up, and a comment suggests it works on a D3100, bit confused.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0012UUP...UTF8&colid=3787SSNX41MMU&coliid=I1OSLJ523532Y

Thank you~
Click to expand...

I really wouldn't go down that route, cheap zoom lenses are cheap for a reason. Before you spend any money, spend some time shooting with the 50mm and see how you go, that combo is capable of creating stunning images even in moderate light, apologies for the cheesy quote but 'it aint the arrow its the Indian!'

Another thing to consider is contacting a (good) photographer that isn't on your doorstep but within easy reach and see if they'd be will to give you some 1:1 tuition on using the kit you have for portraits. For many portrait and wedding photographers this is a quiet time of year and they may welcome the extra income.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top