Kit or Not

[pupil]

Hello,everyone:

I'm thinking of getting a D90 to start with but can't decide which lens (lenses) to get.

Should I go with the kit lens 18-105VR or 18-55VR & 55-200VR ( since they cost about the

same) .Any advice or suggestion on other combination of lenses will be very much appreciate

.Thank You.

[dcclark]

What would you like to do with the camera? For example: landscapes, portraits, action, etc.

Also, what things are important: convenience, weight, maximum flexibility, image quality, etc.?

Those questions will help with an answer!

[pupil]

Mostly portraits and landscapes.

The quality of the image is the most important to me.

Thank You!

[dcclark]

In that case I wouldn't get either. Get the D90 body only. For portraits (and general work), either the 50mm f/1.8, or the 35mm f/1.4, would both be good choices. They're both very inexpensive (around $100 for the 50mm, $200 for the 35mm -- but it'll be a more reasonable field of view), fast (for indoor work), and good quality.

For landscapes, I'd wait a bit and perhaps play around with renting or borrowing some wide-angles. None of the kit lenses goes particularly wide (although 18mm is decent), but you'll probably eventually want something that goes to 10 or 12mm. But, I wouldn't shuck out the cash yet, until you've had a chance to play around with them.

That's just my thoughts, but I'd bet that you can do without either of those kit setups!

[pupil]

Thank you for your advice.Now I know which lens I'll be getting.

Thank again!!!

[dcclark]

Oops, I meant f/1.8 for both the 50mm and 35mm. There is no f/1.4 35mm from Nikon.

Don't just take my word for it. Others may chime in. Read up on lenses a bit. And take your time... no need to buy all of your lenses right up front!

[pupil]

Yes Sir!

Thank You Very Much!

[inkista]

I'm weird; I go the other way. Getting one of the kits will at least give you lenses to shoot with until you know what you want, and those lenses will give you enough experience to be able to make more knowledgeable lens decisions than going by what folks on a board tell you to get.

While you can get by with a single prime lens like the 35/1.8 (dcclark--there is a Nikkor 35/1.4: it's a manual focus $1100 lens), I'd say get a 50/1.8 or 35/1.8 in addition to either kit, and that way you'll have experience with prime vs. zoom, wide-to-telephoto focal lengths, and fast to slow max. apertures, with and without VR. All for about $400, which is less than the price of one good mid-grade lens. That way, you can judge for yourself if you need/want those features or if you even need to upgrade from entry level.

Foregoing the kit is great if a) you already have lenses, or b) know exactly what lenses you want to get. Without either, a kit lens is a cheap way to fill the gap until you get the experience and knowledge you need to figure out what you want.

Whether you go for the single or dual lens kit is basically the trade-off of reach vs. single-lens convenience. Given that you want to shoot portraits and landscapes, you probably don't need the extra telephoto reach of the 55-200. But then, when I started out, I never thought I'd need a telephoto lens, and here I am with a 400mm prime for birding.

[pupil]

Originally Posted by inkista

I'm weird; I go the other way. Getting one of the kits will at least give you lenses to shoot with until you know what you want, and those lenses will give you enough experience to be able to make more knowledgeable lens decisions than going by what folks on a board tell you to get.

While you can get by with a single prime lens like the 35/1.8 (dcclark--there is a Nikkor 35/1.4: it's a manual focus $1100 lens), I'd say get a 50/1.8 or 35/1.8 in addition to either kit, and that way you'll have experience with prime vs. zoom, wide-to-telephoto focal lengths, and fast to slow max. apertures, with and without VR. All for about $400, which is less than the price of one good mid-grade lens. That way, you can judge for yourself if you need/want those features or if you even need to upgrade from entry level.

Foregoing the kit is great if a) you already have lenses, or b) know exactly what lenses you want to get. Without either, a kit lens is a cheap way to fill the gap until you get the experience and knowledge you need to figure out what you want.

Whether you go for the single or dual lens kit is basically the trade-off of reach vs. single-lens convenience. Given that you want to shoot portraits and landscapes, you probably don't need the extra telephoto reach of the 55-200. But then, when I started out, I never thought I'd need a telephoto lens, and here I am with a 400mm prime for birding.

How about a combination of 35/1.8 and 55-200 ?? That should be more than enough for a

beginner to play with ( learn from).?

[inkista]

Originally Posted by pupil

How about a combination of 35/1.8 and 55-200 ?? That should be more than enough for a

beginner to play with ( learn from).?

You won't have wide angle coverage. And you did mention landscapes....

If there's one lens you want to give up as a starter lens out of the three kit lenses you mentioned, it's probably the 55-200. While telephoto can be useful for landscapes and portraits, it's more common to use wide angles for landscape, and a fast prime for portraits.

I'd also recommend taking a look at this lens primer, just so you can get a sense of what focal length and maximum aperture mean in practical shooting terms.