Even though I love the 18-105, I don't think it's worth double the 18-55. Maybe the 55-200 vr is the way to go. As to landscapes, you can take multiple images that overlap and stitch them together with a panorama stitching program like hugin (it's free). It will automatically align them for you.
Edit: here's another thread that talks about hugin. http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=733

Hi guys I am also new to D 5000 bought recently. I was off to Himachal on a holiday with family and had a great time clicking away however with the 18-55 lens that came as a package, I found two limitations: I could not zoom a distant object very easily and also the wide and beautiful landscapes of Himalaya ranges could be captured only to some limited width... please suggest which other lens should I add?

I am thinking of NIKKOR 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED VR which is coming for RS 10000-12000 that is roughly my budget.

I also have an offer to exchange my 18-55 lens with a 18-105 lens and the shopkeeper will buy it back for Rs. 5000 and will give me the 18-105 for about Rs. 12000 ( I hope I remember the deal correctly)

Please help

cenkog said:
18-55 VR kit lens is really an excellent performer... You dont need another lens for your purpose...

I agree, and for 650$ D5000/18-55 kit this lens comes for free. For babies and portraits in general you will not be able to use any larger aperture then 5.6 anyway because DOF will be very shallow.
If you decide to go closer to that pretty face or if you do appreciate Macro feature 85mm VR micro for 550$ is probably the best DX choice.

18-55 VR kit lens is really an excellent performer... You dont need another lens for your purpose...

I dunno, you really need to check out the lenses, preferably at a store first. I have the 35mm 1.8 and I love it, but I wish sometimes it were wider, so you need to check that out on your own.

From my best knowledge I would say that portrait pictures have to be taken by whatever zoom lens (above 50mm on 24x36). Having wider lens you can get closer to the subject (baby) but the face would have funny look. Any fixed zoom (telephoto) would provide better DOF but limits your ability to move around (you have to stay at fixed distance from the subject to get it inside the frame). So I believe that 18-105 or 16-85 is good alternative. But keep shooting above 50mm equivalent on 24x36.

Simple example:

EXIF is there, taken by 18-105, only reduced by size.

LOL you are right Adamz .. its preferences that matter. I love using my 150 F2.8. for everything! LOL.

but for a new user, get the 18-105 kit lens. I have played with it, and its really nice. Its a newer design than the 18-55 and the 55-200.

I will also go for a VR kit - with both of the cheap VR lenses - 18-55, 55-200, just remember to get the hood for Your 18-55, as it's not included (at least not in Europe). Than I'll probably add 35/1.8. 50mm on DX is just too weird for me.
As for using telephoto lenses indoors.... I do it, and love it :) and for me even 340mm (200+TC17) is not tight enough sometimes :) - it's just a matter of preferences.

Hearty has a point. I say get the kit, shoot, and have fun.

Then you can decide on another lens. That is, if you need another lens.

55-200 and the 35mm are specialist lenses these days.. It just does not make sense to me to get specialist lenses with your first DSLR. What you need first off is a generalist lens like the 18-55 or if you have more money, improve the range of that first generalist lens.
* 18-105 VR ( I think this is the best value for a starter kit.)
* 16-85 VR (wider and sharper) or 18-200 VR (huge range)

* Why the 18-105 is better than the 35mm? Range! VR! 18-35 is a significant range to be missing out on for a first lens!
* Why the 18-105 is better than the 55-200? with the D5000 105 is not that much less than 200 for most uses just crop to get 200mm FOV ( except if you want tele then best get a real telephoto lens like the 300mm F4)) and 90% of most shots you will want to take is between 18-55.

Most of all you dont want to be swaping lenses. there is already so much to try to learn without having to swap lenses and worrying about getting dust on the sensor!

kellenfreeman said:
Personally I think that 85mm really is too close for indoors.

Me too. Even 50mm on DX can be tight at times.

mb said:
It is mid telephoto and is very usable for portraits indoor or else ...
On the other hand you could always get AF-S 60 f/2.8 Micro that is even sharper, is FX lens so you are sort of future proof, and it is just about the right length ... it is not VR though and 85 is much better for insects macro shooting ...
Choices choices ...

Personally I think that 85mm really is too close for indoors.

alphanikonrex said:
Welcome to the forum janelmarie!

I would recommend getting the 35mm ƒ/1.8, simply a great lens! As for macro, well the kit lens is OK at that. Get the camera kit and then get the 35mm—Nikon's kit lens is pretty good, and later if you need it you can get a telephoto lens.

I whole hartedly agree. The 35mm f/1.8 is an excellent choice. Plus, some will disagree, the Nikon SB400 flash used as a bounce light. Some don't like it, but within its limitations it works well and is easy to operate. It has no controls with which to adjust, simply attach and shoot. JMHO

alphanikonrex said:
Yes, but unfortunately it's a telephoto, which are difficult to use indoors.

It is mid telephoto and is very usable for portraits indoor or else ...
On the other hand you could always get AF-S 60 f/2.8 Micro that is even sharper, is FX lens so you are sort of future proof, and it is just about the right length ... it is not VR though and 85 is much better for insects macro shooting ...
Choices choices ...

mb said:
New Nikon AF-S DX Micro 85mm f/3.5 VR Lens is a surprisingly sharp lens, is very usable for portraits, babies and macro on a DX camera and it has VR so you should be able to shoot without flash so you may consider this one.

Yes, but unfortunately it's a telephoto, which are difficult to use indoors.

If you got standard 18-55 I really do not see any reason for you to not be happy with it. It is very usable lens and IQ is more than acceptable.
For babies, as for portraits in general, I would consider something a bit longer.
New Nikon AF-S DX Micro 85mm f/3.5 VR Lens is a surprisingly sharp lens, is very usable for portraits, babies and macro on a DX camera and it has VR so you should be able to shoot without flash so you may consider this one.

A good book set that I have liked is called, Photo Workshop, then there is more to the title depending on what the book is about. You can go to the website and see the whole set. *Link Removed* If you want to learn how to use the camera the best way you can, I would get Exposure. It is a step by step basic green mode to fully manual mode. There is also a book on taking photos of children. If you can get them at the library then I would get the Exposure 1st and learn the camera, then get the children one so your not lost when they are talking about different things.

You might even look for one of these Instruction DVD's they are actual well liked, then for other book I would go to a bookstore see what you like to read about, how advanced do you want to become

Pete

Thank you everyone for your wonderful suggestions! My husband found a kit deal including the 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6G lens. I think we will be getting that kit plus the 35mm 1.8 and then purchasing the 18-55 as an add on since it is less expensive. The flash will be my next step. Any suggestions on good beginner books?

Thanks again and wish me luck!

PatMann said:
However, you should be aware it will bring a whole new range of frustrations you will become aware of, including lens speed, AF speed and tracking, lens focal length range, equipment weight, storage, accessory carrying, lighting, etc. (I think everyone here will agree that to be always ready for baby bix, you really need to carry both a D3s and D3x, with 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200 lenses, 85mm f/1.4, 35mm f/2, 100mm f/2.8 AF-S micro at a minimum. Each room of your home should of course be set up as a studio, with multiple flashes, flash controllers for each camera, a beauty dish, two or three softboxes, C-stands, reflectors, etc, to be always ready to shoot the best baby pix in every situation.)

You'll also want to have a good P&S for those times when you don't have this bulky stuff with you.

Is that a description of your setup, WOW, I would settle for the D3s and maybe the 14-24, my studio light is only for location use and are in their storage bag

Pete

Even the 18-55 is a great lens for baby pix, and the camera will be a big step past a P&S for quick reaction. It will be a great learning lens and has an excellent zoom range for basic snapshooting.

The mid-range zoom is much more flexible than the 35mm, which though an excellent lens IMO has a relatively narrow field of view, very restrictive particularly for shooting inside (though the additional light-gathering power is quite useful inside in available light). My "normal" shooting is typically at 16-18mm or so or 50-75mm, rarely use the mid-range of my mid-range zooms, which is where the 35mm puts you. Shooting kids is more than shooting portraits - it's their activities, their environment, their friends and family.

My suggestion for the same amount of money as a step-up lens is the SB400 flash, $120 or so, which will be a big improvement over the built-in flash, allowing you to use indirect flash for much more natural flash lighting. If your budget permits, the SB600 or SB900 flashes plus off-camera bracket would provide even more lighting flexibility, at a cost in weight and bulk.

Enjoy - this camera should substantially reduce your frustration with shooting delay.

However, you should be aware it will bring a whole new range of frustrations you will become aware of, including lens speed, AF speed and tracking, lens focal length range, equipment weight, storage, accessory carrying, lighting, etc. (I think everyone here will agree that to be always ready for baby bix, you really need to carry both a D3s and D3x, with 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200 lenses, 85mm f/1.4, 35mm f/2, 100mm f/2.8 AF-S micro at a minimum. Each room of your home should of course be set up as a studio, with multiple flashes, flash controllers for each camera, a beauty dish, two or three softboxes, C-stands, reflectors, etc, to be always ready to shoot the best baby pix in every situation.)

You'll also want to have a good P&S for those times when you don't have this bulky stuff with you.

Just chiming in to say that the 18-105mm has a plastic mount. This could be a non-issue or a big problem, depending on how prone to droppage you might be.

(Personally, I refuse to buy plastic mount lenses. That might just be me.)

The 35mm 1.8 is a great lens. Really wonderful for its price.

Like everyone has said already, there are lots of ways to go with this. I have most everything they said to get and they all work great. The 50mm 1.8 lens is super sharp and takes great photos. The 35mm 1.8 is just as good, but you get the bonus of auto focus for later when she starts moving around and wont stay still for you. The SB-600 Flash is awesome and everything in a flash that most people would want.

For you I would say get the 35mm 1.8 lens. It has the least amount of drawl backs in the group of 3. I take loads of photos of my brothers kids and the 50mm is nice, but since it wont auto focus on my D60 it is hard to get a nice photo since they don't stop moving. The flash will get you good photos in low light and let you shoot with a fast shutter speed, but I tend to get a lot of photos with closed eyes and a dazed look. That is with bouncing it too.

The 35mm will shoot great in low light and blur out the background so she is the main focus of the photo. It also will auto focus so you are ready when she starts running around on you.

Jessi said:
it really isn't long before you start getting pictures that are so much better than what you can get with your point and shoot that it is totally worth it.

Yes, Jessi's right on with that one. Even a DSLR with a kit lens will take better pictures that a point and shoot!

I thought of something else - again, based totally on my own experience - I would guess that really until you have had your camera for a while and start taking pictures, a lot of what we are saying here will not make much sense to you. How old is your baby? If she is not yet mobile - you can basically put her anywhere that you can find good light and take pictures with your kit lens, even if most of your house is low light, until you understand more what your specific needs are. I think most if not all houses have good light somewhere at some point in the day.

First starting out in photography, there is so much to learn, and it seems overwhelming. But even though there is always more to learn, it really isn't long before you start getting pictures that are so much better than what you can get with your point and shoot that it is totally worth it.