Priyaaanka said:
Thank you all...I wanted sharper pictures and great closeups for potraits and scenery. I feel that with the 18-55vr i can't really do either. I have been looking deeper into what my camera and the current lens can do for me. I will keep posting updates!

thanks again!

when i had the 18-55mm VR, i could do both portraits and scenery. And the focussing distance was quite close so closeups were quite ok. I actually concur with the rest. Learn your current equipment properly then only research and decide what you really want. And most importantly, shoot more!

I recommend that you get a 35mm 1.8G. It's cheap, the focal length is pretty versatile, and you will keep it as your skills progress. You'll be able to isolate your subjects for portraiture, play with depth of field, and further, will have some fun with natural light photos that require a fast lens.

Priyaaanka said:
Thank you all...I wanted sharper pictures and great closeups for potraits and scenery. I feel that with the 18-55vr i can't really do either. I have been looking deeper into what my camera and the current lens can do for me. I will keep posting updates!

thanks again!

Please clarify.. "can't really do either" implies 2 things. "sharper pictures and great closeups for potraits and scenery" implies 4 things. Do you mean closeups of scenery? sorry for not understanding...

Pryiaanka, sadly but true, as it was written before - at this moment stick to this what You have, as it looks like You have problem's with distinguishing this two totally different lenses
the first one - used to be a top pro lens, extremely fast aperture, neutral (human eye) angle of view, manual focus, reportage/semi-portrait lens
the second one [70-300vr] - is an amateur (advanced amateur) zoom lens, much much darker than 50/1.2, has a build in VR that works quite well, it's a moderate to long telephoto (comparing to the 50mm lens this one has a 6x zoom factor), has a build in ultrasonic focusing motor [AF-S] and is used mostly in either wildlife, travel or occasional portrait photography

Nikoner said:
Hey Priyaaanka

I have heard 85mm 1.8D is a great portrait lens too. ~$300.00 used and $415 new.

Edited once to add: "Happy Birthday!" we share the same birthday on this forum.

Hey Priyaaanka

I have heard 85mm 1.8D is a great portrait lens too. ~$300.00 used and $415 new.

Thank you all...I wanted sharper pictures and great closeups for potraits and scenery. I feel that with the 18-55vr i can't really do either. I have been looking deeper into what my camera and the current lens can do for me. I will keep posting updates!

thanks again!

If you do want to try an AIS lens you should be able to get the 50mm 1.4 ais for a good price second hand. The F1.2 is a specialist lens that is not as sharp as the new lenses. Great for portraits but really need expert skills to get the most out of. The 70-300 is a nice tele and would be a fun lens to get. Both lenses you mentioned are fun and would be great if you knew why you want them.

What made you consider those 2 specific lenses?

Priyaaanka,

I'd agree with the above, stick with your kit lens for now. I've been very impressed with the D90s 18-105 kit lens which is somewhat better than the "replacement" lens I got for my last camera. Nikon's kit lenses in general seem to offer very good quality given their low price.

Develop your skills, and the lens choice won't be so baffling.

There are three things you need - artistic skill, good equipment, knowing how to get the best from the equipment.

Shoot with your kit, then get a 35 1.8

I wouldn't recommend an 18-200, I've heard many horror stories about them.

I feel your pain, but you need to be patient. I just got my D5000 a month ago and I already want new lenses and flashes and everything, but what I really need is to learn how to use the camera. If you don't know what all the settings do then jumping to another lens won't really benefit you. The 18-55 lens actually seems pretty sharp (I have it and use it and it works). I purchased my lens..the 18-200 VR lens before I got my body and then was disappointed at first. The lens costs around $700 and I thought since it cost more it would work better. It does work well, but it has taken me some time to figure it out and what aperture settings work best.

Just my $.02 since I just recently got my camera also. Read books, the manual, forums and learn about what you can do with the camera before you spend more money on lenses. Really figure out what you want...the 2 lenses you suggested are for very different purposes.

Agree with Niko. Priyaaanka, the quetions you had about the D5000 are things that you really need to nail down before you move along with buying additional equipment. Although, it can be frustrating not to have a tele lens when you really want one. Without knowing your financial condition (and I don't want to know), it's hard to advise whether to look at the 55-200 vs the 70-300 ($170 vs $550). As I recently stated in another post, unless you have some pressing need for the tele lens, spend your time and money on learning the basics of your camera - which includes taking as many pictures as possible (it's almost free, just dlete to your heart's content). PRACTICE.

I'd recommend you stay with your kit lens for now Priyaaanka until you learn more about how to use your camera.

The 50mm prime is good for when you don't have a lot of light. I wouldn't get an Ai-S lens, though, because it won't let your camera autofocus or do automatic metering. I'd get a 35 1.8 DX lens, which costs about $200 and will autofocus on your camera. It's a great lens.

The 70-300 is a sharp lens and is used for telephoto shots like close-up portraits and sports.

If you have the 18-55, you might want to consider the 55-200 VR, which is cheap and does a great job for the price.

Which lens is better and what are their purposes/uses?

Nikon 50mm f/1.2 Nikkor Ai-S Manual Focus Lens or
Nikkor 70-300 VR or
any other suggestions.

thanks,

Priyaaanka