db_cro said:
...thx on your comments... now I'm sure that next will be 70-300VR and after I'll look forward on the 16-85...

16-85 is here :)) http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2378&replies=8#post-81380 ..now looking for 70-300VR...

DaveyJ said:
To NSXType-R: How fast things change! Here it is October 15th and the B&H Photo site now has the 70-300VR at $589 for both USA and "Imported". The MAP policy is here now and Nikon rebates and specials will I guess be the primary savings possible??

Crap, there goes my next lens purchase!

Oh well, gotta get to using my other lenses anyway.

To NSXType-R: How fast things change! Here it is October 15th and the B&H Photo site now has the 70-300VR at $589 for both USA and "Imported". The MAP policy is here now and Nikon rebates and specials will I guess be the primary savings possible??

To come back to the original question....I'd take a 18-105VR lens over a 55-200 as the second lens doesn't do much for all around photos or quality compared to some of the other alternatives addressed here. I believe the best combo for D90, D7000, etc. at "affordable" prices is the 18-105VR combined with the 70-300VR Nikkor. For a beginner the kit prices are very attractive. Once you are at the level of a number of us at Nikon Rumors......we already own many of the kit lenses.....then the purchase of yeat another 18-105VR as a kit purchase is a little less attractive. The 55-200 I just would not buy. Another I have come to really doubt is the new 18-55VR often purchased by newbies as a kit with the body. In awhile they want to move to the 18-105VR and wish they did not buy the cameras kit with the 18-55VR.

DaveyJ said:
The 70-300VR Nikkor is $489 @ B&H Photo today (Oct 8th, 2011) and about $440 refurb. It is a great lens. Buy it with a camera or another lens and it is less money.

Wow, it's that cheap now? Last time I checked it was around $600.

The 70-300VR Nikkor is $489 @ B&H Photo today (Oct 8th, 2011) and about $440 refurb. It is a great lens. Buy it with a camera or another lens and it is less money.

It's around $550usd

how much is 70-300?

...thx on your comments... now I'm sure that next will be 70-300VR and after I'll look forward on the 16-85...

I was fifteen when I got hooked by photography.

The 18-105 is the lens that I find myself using most of the time (with my D90). For the money, I'm hugely impressed by the 18-105 lens.

I also have the 55-200, although I do not use it often. It's a good quality lens, very lightweight, and has a good overlap with the 18-105 to reduce lens swapping.

I also use the 35/1.8 - WHAT a little gem. And the 12-24mm - truly excellent, but sadly way, way out of reach for most teenagers!

I agree with Bland! The 70-300VR is a almost must have lens. I shoot D90, D300, D700 and use the 70-300VR every day. The D90 is every bit as good as the D300 and D700 for many uses. I even know gals who use the 70-300VR on D3100 and have awesome results to prove that lens value. For what it is worth the 18-200VR is also an awesome lens. I use a 12-24 DX a lot and on 24 it is hard to beat with ANY lens and on 12 it is wide and can take in scenes that make you think the 12mm view is critical. A 18-105VR is a good match with the 70-300VR but I have seen it paired with a 18-55VR and again with results to prove that combination can work also. I strongly suggest what ever glass you use, be sure to dial in the 70-300VR!!

I shoot the D90 and by far the 70-300VR is my favorite lens. It's a must to have and affordable, it shoots extremely fast and pure.

sorry to hear you did not get any new lenses db-cro.

nikon prices have been up on new and used equipment ever since the earthquake.

70-300 is very nice, make sure and get the VR model.

cant comment on the 18-200, don't have one, never even got to play with one.

thank you for giving us the follow up, it is most appreciated, and good luck with your journey into the world of photography.

Unfortunately, I haven’t bought anything last month in Singapore or Kuala Lumpur as I couldn’t got a good price. Hopefully, next time I’ll be luckier especially as I sold in the meantime my 55-200 and now I need 70-300. Anyway, I can still deal with my 18-105 as my primer lens, even sometimes pictures are not sharp enough. I’m sure that 16-85 will improve this…

@DaveyJ
Not sure for 18-200VR will meet my criteria?...

The D90 is an awesome camera for the price range. I use mine almost as much as a D300, and my D700 is used a lot less. I would opt myself for the 18-105VR kit lens as the kits are a good deal. Some outfits like B&H have had very few D7000 without the kit lens.

I would ask casperwb about the prime lens sucking dust onto sensors? I unfortunately bought a D40X with a 18-135 Nikkor lens, got a second body and BOTH have dust on the sensor. I should have returned both bodies, not just one!! If you are careful you can do a lot of lens changes and not get dust on the low pass filters/sensors (whatever). But if you do get dust on the rig I think it has to be removed or your images will suffer.

Post shooting cleanup of dust is both redundant and will degrade your images. Learn how to swap lens (you can call Nikon Digital Hotline from anywhere in the world and have them walk you through that). I tip the camera body down and same for the lens without the cap over the end that goes to to the f mount during the swap. Also be careful to wait until a safe time to sap lens.

Right now you will have one lens and I find that I use fixed focal length lens less. Also know that db_cro and casperwb are astute photographers and at that 35mm point the prime lens would be tough to beat.

You will get a better deal on the D90 with the 18-105VR kit lens. One warning though you might want to remember that over time if you become rally serious about photo work, you'll make precious little use of a kit lens. The 18-200VR is one "kit lens" that I would say is a real keeper. Just that the 18-200VR isn't going to be anywhere near as low a price.

good choice, you cannot go wrong with the 35mm 1.8.

all those f1.8 primes are fantastic, and as someone pointed out on another thread, primes do not suck dust onto your sensor, while zooms do.

the 70-300 is fantastic in good light, however if you do a search for the lenses you are intrested in, you will find tons of info to help you with your choice.

Good luck shopping, getting a "new' lens even though they may be used, is like christmas all over again.

casperwb said:
we cannot answer that question for you, as only you know your protography intrest.

...that's a true, I'm only one who can answer to me on this question, but forums like this one can help us. And this is a reason why I've joined to you.

...anyway, next week I'll be in Singapore and this will be a good opportunity to find some lenses for good price.... you will know...

...at least, as I already have several zoom lenses, I'll probably buy one prime lens - AF-S 35mm F1.8G DX

casperwb said:
13 year old ?

I was starting to pickup some work at that age, more decades ago than I care to think.

There have been many young teens in my photography classes, too, and Brownie Girl Scouts have photo badges. My, ahem, adult middle-age daughter has more than one.

While I hope most 13-year-olds are enjoying growing up, if the chops are there, it can also be a method of making a few coins, even paying the way through college (as I did).

My best,

Mike

db_cro said:
… because new users still coming to find answers on similar questions, like me…

… for an example, I’ve read these topic because I’m looking for answer as I’ve a doubt: does I need AF-S 16-85mm and 70-300 lenses or not? I’ve already 18-55, 55-200 & 18-105 all VR… they are not bad at all, but I’m looking on something better… from other side, I’m still not ready to spend more than 1000$ for one lens…

…btw, me apologies for but typing as I’m Croatian… thx

we cannot answer that question for you, as only you know your protography intrest.

kyoshinikon said:
Why is this thread still open?

… because new users still coming to find answers on similar questions, like me…

… for an example, I’ve read these topic because I’m looking for answer as I’ve a doubt: does I need AF-S 16-85mm and 70-300 lenses or not? I’ve already 18-55, 55-200 & 18-105 all VR… they are not bad at all, but I’m looking on something better… from other side, I’m still not ready to spend more than 1000$ for one lens…

…btw, me apologies for but typing as I’m Croatian… thx

Neither, get the 35mm f1.8... :P

Why is this thread still open?

I was 13 as well when I joined the forum and I can tell you that the 55-200mm VR is a /fun/ lens. I sat around and researched for about half a year before I finally got the money and jumped on a D90 with an 18-55mm VR + 55-200mm VR.

From my experience I can tell you that the 55-200 VR is a really fun lens. It's optically okay, and even with it being fairly slow (f 1:4-5.6 :P ) you can still get good bokeh. On a crop body you can zoom in a lot. It's also cheap compared to other lenses.

I have never taken photos at a golf tourney but in my experience I have a tendency to zoom a lot at sporting events.

Then again, the range of the 18-105mm might suit you better as each photographer has their own technique. It certainly is hard to get everyone in a frame for a group-portrait with a 55-200mm, especially indoors.

Good luck on your decision!

EDIT: oh man, this thread is a year old.

What's the matter Casper? You afraid of the competition? LOL

13 year old ?

skylightsky said:
Hello,

Recently purchased a D5000 and the 70-300mm lens. I will be given a Macro lens for extreme close up, so now I am wondering what should be my next lens purchase.

My favorite subject to shoot is my new grandbaby, with shooting being indoors. Was curious about purchasing 50mm f/1.4G AF-S or something similar to the 20mm f/2.8D AF Lens, but d5000 compatible.

Portrait lens nice, landscape lens attractive, unsure what to do next.

Sort of afraid of fixed lens, but want to increase my skill...

suggestions... and the answers can be broader than the question here... But my budget doesn't allow for the $1,600 dream lenses but if somebody wants to praise them during the answer, please do so. I can always rent one of them, but my budget for purchase is under $1000 US dollars.

Thanks.

My answer would in part depend on which macro lens you are getting. The macro can also be quite useful for other things. Either the 60mm or 85mm AF-S macro lenses would make good short to medium telephoto lenses for a DX camera. The 60mm is f/2.8, which would give you a relatively fast prime lens for general-purpose use, though it's a relatively narrow field of view.

Since you say your budget is $1000, I would suggest the 10-24 zoom and either the 18-55 VR or the 35 DX to fill out the range between 24mm and your macro or telephoto zoom. The 18-55 gives you a good general-purpose snapshot lens, and the 35mm gives you a "normal" faster prime for lower-light situations. The 10-24 completes your focal length range for the full range of normal photographs, excluding only specialty telephotos for wildlife and high-speed zooms for sports and live performance.

While the 16-85 is a great general-purpose lens, and since I got it is probably on my camera as often as my 12-24, with your budget you can't afford both that lens and a wider one.