For Christmas my Husband bought me the Nikon D5000. Ok i am learning to use it....i was told by someone you can buy other lenses (different brands maybe) that will be compatible with my camera?! Is this true.....and what are the best to get...i will be taking alot of action shots with my children basketball, football, baseball and so on. Any help will be greatly appreciated....Thanks
My new Nikon D5000
(50 posts) (13 voices)-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
Many brands are available, Sigma, and Tokina are the best known 3rd party lens makers, but I personally wouldn't put anything other than Nikon optics on a Nikon camera.
For action, it would be best to have a look at the mid-long zoom lenses, such as the 55-200/3.5-5.6, or the 70-300/3.5-5.6.
In combination with the 18-55 that probably came with the camera, this will give you quite a versatile setup.
Posted 3 years ago # -
I agree with Chris, Nikon NIKKOR optics are the best. I'd stick to them.
Same goes for lenses, except Chris messed up the names :^P They actually are the 55-200 ƒ/4-5.6 and the 70-300 ƒ/4.5-5.6. Both'll meet your needs well.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Haha Alpha, I can never remember those stupid variable apertures. Anyway, yes, the 55-200 and 70-300 are both quite affordable and will likely give you the reach you want in terms of a zoom.
Posted 3 years ago # -
You gonna shoot indoors or outdoors, what's Your budget?
Posted 3 years ago # -
Thanks for all the posts to my question...I will be taking shots in door and out....football, basketball, soccer....5 kids lots of picture taking...i am so used to a camera that basically does everything for you....this is the FIRST CAMERA I have ever owed that needs lenses and so on. So I have alot of reading and research to do with even understanding 55-200 or 70-300 WHAT it even means....dah....but im learning.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Welcome to the forum, lisa. It can be a little overwhelming with all the numbers and things. 55-200mm and 70-300mm are the ranges of the focal lengths that the zoom lenses can be adjusted to. The kit lens that probably came with the camera (18-55mm) gives a pretty wide angle of view, so it isn't ideal for sports. The two that were mentioned are better choices for sports. The 300mm is good for when you're far away because it will be zoomed by a factor of 16x compared with the kit lens at 18mm (because 300/18 = 16.7).
The 70-300 is supposedly a great value. I haven't ever tried it so I can't recommend it personally, but having the 300mm on the telephoto end would be nice to have for sports from across the field/court.Posted 3 years ago # -
For sports the lens to lust after is the 70-200 F2.8 VR !! But if your kids are fairly young and you can get close to them on the field/court while they are playing then a 35mm F1.8 will get your shutter speed up so you wont get blurry images indoors in bad light. If you cant get close then the 55-200 is nice and just Up the ISO.
Posted 3 years ago # -
as pictures are worth more than words:
- nikon 55-200 vr
- nikon 70-300 vr
the first one is a amateur telephoto zoom - small, cheap - good quality for money
the second one is a semi-pro telephoto zoom - larger than the first one, better quality than the first one, more expensive (almost 2x), more robust than the first one
if You have d5000, than both of this lenses will suite You, both indoor (with iso 1600+) or outdoor (iso 400+). if You need something brighter/bigger/heavier/better and You are eager to spend $5k+ than there are more choices available :)
Posted 3 years ago # -
I would love to pair that camera with a 70-200 2.8 VR, but that's a bit overkill, and it could be above your budget too.
The two lenses that the other members suggested would be perfect, plus it would be a relatively small and light combination as well- the 55-200 and the 70-300. I would lean towards the 70-300, I think it's slightly better.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Basketball will be tough to shoot as most gyms are poorly lit.
On a budget, I'd go with the 55-200. You'll need to crank the ISO up to about 800 or so, but you should still get decent shots.
For soccer, I probably would opt for the 70-300. You get a bit more reach with the 300 and it has a little better build quality.
If money is no object, then the best lens for both situations is the 70-200 VRII. But now you are talking about a lot of cash. So don't bother unless you are stupidly rich and already have all five children's college paid for.
Posted 3 years ago # -
I don't think we need to worry about ISO and such. Remember, Lisa's coming from a point and shoot that probably gave image quality worse than ISO 6400 on the D5000! ;^)
But the point is, cranking up the ISO a little won't hurt at all. But if she wants to go the whole a hog and get the 70-200, well then, be my guest :^D
Posted 3 years ago # -
Ok any one want to tell me what ISO means?? Oh My i am so not camera literate...
Posted 3 years ago # -
No college is not paid for yet...only one in college rest in grade school...reasonable priced and what im looking to use camera for does the trick for me!! Love the pictures of the lenses so perfect for me...haha.
Posted 3 years ago # -
lisa said:
Ok any one want to tell me what ISO means?? Oh My i am so not camera literate...ISO is the sensitivity of the camera. They higher the ISO, the higher the shutter speed the camera can use, allowing it to freeze motion better. However, cranking up the ISO degrades image quality.
Not a very good explanation, hopefully someone else has a better one.
Posted 3 years ago # -
ISO is the sensitivity of your camera's sensor to light.
A camera set to ISO 200 will expose twice as quickly as a camera set to ISO 100 given the same amount of light. This means you get shorter shutter speeds. For sports, you want short shutter speeds because your subject may be moving quickly. If the subject moves more than a few pixels during the time the shutter is open, you could get motion blur.
Don't let us get you all worried. The good news is that your D90 will figure all of this out for you if you want it to. Just drop it into the sports mode on your dial. All you need to know is that lenses with the smaller F number (ex. F 2.8) are able to capture images more quickly than lenses with higher F numbers.
Posted 3 years ago # -
ISO answer is good enough for me to understand.....Thank you ...Also Adamz posted the pics of lenses....with also a connection to amazon web site for lenses....Any comment on buying USED LENSES?! OR ANY ONE SELLING ANY OF THESE LENSES?! Just thought i ask, why not ...
Posted 3 years ago # -
-
Ok there is Nikon of course, then Nikkor and or Sigma......prices are extremely different from Nikon lense vs Nikkor or Sigma....new - used....oh what to do!!
Posted 3 years ago # -
Lisa I wish you all the best with your new camera and I will also wish to congratulate you on your choice of Husband who bought you such a lovely present but somehow it seams to me that you are pooling our noses here a bit don't you now?
Posted 3 years ago # -
I also favor the Nikon lenes as most here do. Yes, they are more expensive, but I find the optical quality, and performance to be better. I have owned Tamron lenses, and have tried Sigma and Tokina lenses with varying results. Sometimes the third party lenses may not focus as fast as the Nikons do.
I own the 70-300 VR and have shot girls soccer games with it; I must say it is a great lens for the money. You would not regret buying that one. The VR on that lens is great as well.
Posted 3 years ago # -
From Ken Rockwell's Site:
Up through the 1970s Nikon only made very expensive professional lenses. Normal people had to buy discount brands lenses if they wanted something they could afford. Buying an off-brand lens was, and still is, the worst of all worlds: spending a lot on a camera, and then getting a dinky lens. The lens is the only part that affects the picture quality, so you are far better of with a crummy camera and good lenses.Nikon and Canon are each primarily lens companies, not camera companies. It's sad to see people buy good cameras and put off-brand lenses on them. The main reason I bought my XTi is to use the great Canon 10-22mm lens!
Enough reason for me! ;^)
You guys know I love KR :^D
Posted 3 years ago # -
lisa - I'm not responsible for amazon ads, it's just an add on on this page, and shows add content depending on words found in topics. nevertheless, I'll lean toward 70-300/vr if Your budget is tight or 70-200/2.8 if You can spend a little bit more. 55-200 is nice, but it's too plastic for me.
if You want to buy used lenses, 300/4 AFS is a good option - it's a prime and You should get one from ebay for less than $700, 70-300/vr is also an e-bay lens. don't bother with used 55-200.
alpha - I would appreciate if You would use the "QUOTE" option only to posts from forums of this site
Posted 3 years ago # -
adamz said:
alpha - I would appreciate if You would use the "QUOTE" option only to posts from forums of this siteFine but why? It's an easy way for me to share what others have written. And no, I don't actually use the "QUOTE" button, I literally write out the code:
<blockquote><cite>You-Know-Who <a href="www.internet.com">said</a>:</cite>Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.</blockquote>Posted 3 years ago # -
alpha - to make this site clean, KR is not a member of this forum (at least he is not posting under KR) so using blockquote can confuse some of the members (PM me if You want to continue this conversation)
Posted 3 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
