Suggestions for D90 « Nikon Rumors Forum

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon Lenses

Suggestions for D90

(38 posts) (12 voices)

Tags:

No tags yet.

12 Next »

mis

member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 12
offline

Hi ALl

I am new to this forum and just joined today. i need some advise.

I am planning to get my first SLR D90. i always wanted to have it but now i have a 5 month old as incentive so the urge is much more than ever.

I will be ostly taking pictures of my baby indoors and outdoors and slowly want to explore more things like naure and landscapes. At some point in future i want to switch to a FX.

I need some advise about which lenses to get. There is the kit lens. someone told me to start with 17-55 DX. some said 35 FX. some said 70-300 FX.

I am pretty confused at this moment. I need help of you folks who are the actual users of Nikon. please advise what shall i start with and what next lenses to get.

Thank you all

Posted 3 years ago #
PB PM

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 2,217
offline

I always advise people to start off go with the kit lens, find out what type of photography you like, and then think about other lenses. Of course, if you already know what focal lengths you like to shoot with from using a point and shoot, then you might want to consider something other than the kit lens.

Posted 3 years ago #
Rockness

member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 13
offline

If you are aiming to take nice photos indoors i suggest that you get the 35mm f/1.8 DX lens or 50mm f/1.4 FX, in addition to your kit lens.

Posted 3 years ago #
heartyfisher

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,701
offline

Tell us a bit about your photography experience.. cos you dont sound "normal" :-) firstly most "normal" people wont be getting a D90 first up and for sure not aiming to "Go FX soon". You sound like you have some experience. But on the other hand you seem to be asking pretty basic lens questions. So I am confused and would like to know more of your photo experience so that we can possibly get better answers for you.

One advice though.. get a camera soon.. they grow up so fast ... then they wont pose anymore.

Posted 3 years ago #
anjz

preferred member
Joined: Feb '10
Posts: 208
offline

I agree with the suggestion for a 35mm lens, or a 50mm 1.4. I would, however, suggest that you get the FX version of the 35 (the 35 f/2) as you are considering upgrading your body in the future. I have the 35 f/2 and 50 1.4G and use both, quite often, indoors with my 3 month old. The 50 is sometimes a little tight, so if you are getting only 1 of them, go for the 35. The 18-55 VRII (kit lens) is also great for outdoor shots, as well as for use indoors with a bounced flash--although natural light looks way better (and who wants to hit their kid with a flash over and over?) so go for a fast prime too.

Posted 3 years ago #
mis

member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 12
offline

heartyfisher said:
Tell us a bit about your photography experience.. cos you dont sound "normal" :-) firstly most "normal" people wont be getting a D90 first up and for sure not aiming to "Go FX soon". You sound like you have some experience. But on the other hand you seem to be asking pretty basic lens questions. So I am confused and would like to know more of your photo experience so that we can possibly get better answers for you.

One advice though.. get a camera soon.. they grow up so fast ... then they wont pose anymore.

Thanks for all the responses. little bit about myself.
I have always used a point and shoot but always facinated by SLRs and wanted to try one but it never happened. also i like the conveneance of a P&S which can be slided into a small pocket. I have 3 P&S and have clicked thousands of pics but lately i am not very happy with the pictures it takes of the baby. some are good and some are bad. also i dont have a real control over the picture plus i cannot really edit jpegs to make them look better. also i went to picture people and they took some great portraits and closeups of the baby but the issue is that baby does not give best poses in studio but at home and i thought i must learn to take good looking professional images at my home settings too.
So i though that it is a good time to switch. after some resaerch i found D90 to be a good camera. The reason i choose it is that i always try to buy a better piece of euipment and D90 looked to be a good choice. but may be you are right, i should consider a D40 instead.
My idea was to buy a good SLR, learn about photography and in a couple of years get good at it so that by the time my son is ready for sports, i can click his pictures with a FX. and i am very passionate about this idea.
So now the questions i have (also i am on a budget, so cant get the best lenses to begin with)
1. Should i get a D90 or something simple like D40
2. If D90 should i buy with kit lens or just the body
3. If D90 plus Kit lens, what additionals should i have
4. If just D90 body, which additional lenses and some suggestions i got
a) 18-55 DX VR2 (used for about 110)
b) Nikon 35mm f/2D AF ($360) or Nikon 50mm f/1.8D ($124)
c) Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF AF-S VR ($510)

Please let me know your suggestions.
Thanks for looking and replying!!

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

I think a D90 is a good camera to consider. You will probably find that it's enough camera for you for years to come unless you read this site regularly and get the idea that you always need the latest and greatest. ;-)

The reason I wouldn't go for a D40/D5000/D60/D3000 is the lack of an autofocus screw. For people on a budget (as I am, as well), it's nice to have the option to buy used (or new) lenses without a built-in autofocus motor, which are usually a little less expensive than their AF-S brothers. The 50 1.8 (~$120 new) is one non-AF-S lens that I'm talking about. It's a bargain and one of the best-performing lenses Nikon makes (also the least expensive—go figure).

I agree with the people who say start with the kit lens (18-105) and, if budget allows, an SB-600 and a 35mm 1.8 (in that order). The birth of my first son got me (re)interested in photography for the same reasons you mentioned. Good luck to you—it's been a fun ride. My wife complained at first about the costs, but then she started to see that, in her words, 'our kids have a better-documented life than anyone's kids I know.' We don't have many formally posed portraits, but it's all the pictures of them 'in their element' that have made the learning, experimenting, and money spent worth it.

Posted 3 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

I'm going against the grain and suggesting you consider a D5000 instead. The flip screen will really make taking photos of a baby from different angles much easier. You want to have both your eyes constantly on your child at all times and not one eye closed while the other is looking through a viewfinder.

But if your mind is set on a D90 then I think you should stick to the 18-105 kit lens. Or a better, but much more expensive,lens would be the 16-85mm. Just be aware that the D90 replacement model (more megapixels, better HD video, flip screen) could be announced as early as this April or early Summer.

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

I just don't like the slow focus in live view, Niko. I know you can have the mirror flip down for autofocus when you take the picture, but even that's not ideal for child photography because you're getting into shutter release times that are similar to point-and-shoots.

For other situations, I would love the screen on the D5000. Video is the biggest one I can think of, especially videos of kids so you can get on their level more easily.

edit: Coming from a point and shoot, you wouldn't be disappointed with a D5000, either. But I still believe a D90 is better for the money because if you're planning on expanding your lens collection at some point, it might end up saving you money to get a camera with an AF screw now.

Posted 3 years ago #
mb

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,160
offline

I agree with Niko, D5000 and 16-85 is the way to go, AF motor is the thing of the past I should say and no new lens will need it.
And you will be appreciating D5000 screen when you shoot the video clips of your little one as I am sure you would.

Posted 3 years ago #
Anaxagoras

preferred member
Joined: Dec '09
Posts: 145
offline

There's some good advice on here, mls.

If you're coming from a P&S you might find the D90 a bit overwhelming. Three months since getting mine I still find myself from time to time looking at the camera rather than using it going "Umm, now how do I do that again?" And I've a fair bit of background in dSLR and film SLR cameras.

The 18-105 kit lens is plenty good enough and plenty versatile to get you going. I'd be staggered if you were disappointed with the results. I'm VERY impressed with my 18-105 and would highly recommend it.

The articulating screen on the D5000 will be great for baby and children shots especially in movie mode. But, as pointed out above, focus is somewhat slower using the screen instead of the viewfinder - a big negative when shooting stills of children!

And, though I agree with jonnyapple on most occasions, I disagree about the AF screw. I believe it's only important for hard-core enthusiasts.

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

if You have kid, get d5000 and 35mm and 18-105 or 16-85 lens, d90 is not a camera for You IMHO - with kids You often need to go very low, and articulated screen will help doing this

Posted 3 years ago #
shivaswrath

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 841
offline

the D90 is a fun toy, go for it!

D5000 has easier menus though. . .I would look at the screens and see which one fits you best. . .the D90 has a nice large 3" display, the D5000 is 25% smaller, but articulates (which is cool, but I dunno, as long as I have Lv view, usually okay). . .

Posted 3 years ago #
mis

member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 12
offline

Thank you all for your time and advises. Yesterday while browsing at AMazon, i saw a good deal. D90(body)+70-300 VR2 for 1000. i thought for a second and ordered it and i was the last one to get that deal as after that i didnt see it again. It may not be the best decision but it has happened now :)
So now i have a D90 and tele. still need to get a low mm and prime. may be i can take a 18-55 and 35 mm /1.8 or 18-105 and 35/1.8

one more question. do i need to get any filters for lens? and any suggestions for a decent tripod.
THanks

Posted 3 years ago #
heartyfisher

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,701
offline

D90 is a good body espcially if you think you may want to take this up more seriously in the future. It gives you the simple modes which you will be familar with from the P&S you have been using but you can also start learning the advanced Manual and Aperture priority stuff when you are ready. I would just go for the 18-105 for now. and a flash like the SB-600. I would suggest you get a flash first before a tripod. but you need both.

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

That's an incredible deal, mis! Ditto what hearty just said. The SB-600 would be more useful than the 35 1.8 right now and it's the same price. It makes a huge difference, especially for inside stuff. I'd get the 18-105 and the SB-600, then save up for a tripod and a 35 1.8. Another lens to consider for the future is the 85 1.8 (another lens that doesn't autofocus on the D5000). It's really an amazing portrait lens.

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

as for filters, get either hoya pro or B+W - but this will be pricey, so IMHO I wouldn't put any filter when the cost of it will exceed more than 10% of lens value

Posted 3 years ago #
warprints

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 769
offline

I think that the SB600, especially for your situation, should be one of your next purchases.

Posted 3 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

Well the 70-300 isn't going to be useful indoors for shooting children. It's not wide enough. Unless you don't mind all of your photos being close up shots. Your going to realize you need a wider lens.

Again I'm going against the grain here but don't worry about spending money on filters or tripods. You can do without the filters for now. Learn to use your camera first. As for the tripod you can get a cheap one from walmart if you really really want one. But I'd skip it and spend the money on a camera bag instead.

Posted 3 years ago #
mis

member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 12
offline

For now i am getting the 35 f/1.8 as well for shooting indoors and a sb-600. i think the rest i can get later. This would be enough to start a journey.
Everyone Thanks again for your comments and time.

Posted 3 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

Good luck mis and please come back and share some of your photos with us!

Posted 3 years ago #
mis

member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 12
offline

i have a question about SB-600. in the spec it says
"Auto Power Zoom Coverage
Provides a wide zoom range covering 24 to 85mm expands to 14mm with built-in wide-flash adapter"

Does this mean that i will not be able to use it with my 70-200 VR (effective 105-450 on a DX)
I am not able to find the answer to this question.

Also i learnt that this flash must be trigreed by camera but not by a independednt trigger. if this is true, can this be a drawback?
REgards

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

You can use it with the 70-300. The zoom range of the flash ends at 85mm, so above that focal length the flash will be illuminating more than the frame, but all that means is a little wasted power. I almost never use it for anything but bounce (and, rarely, fill flash outside) anyway.

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

I forgot to respond to your second question there. The short answer is it shouldn't ever be a limitation. They're saying there's not a place to plug in a flash sync cord except the bottom. This really isn't an issue because you can put your D90 in commander mode and control the SB-600 wirelessly and it meters through the lens to set flash output (Nikon's wireless flash control is really amazing to me). If you ever absolutely need to have wired flash triggering off-camera, you can buy a cable like the SC-29 and you keep through-the-lens flash metering, as well. Personally, I think it's just too much hassle when you can do it without a cable. I own a flash sync cord and it's mostly become a toy for my kids. Sometimes I'll use it to set up my flash to trigger studio lights so I don't have to deal with the preflash.

Posted 3 years ago #
mis

member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 12
offline

jonnyapple said:
I forgot to respond to your second question there. The short answer is it shouldn't ever be a limitation. They're saying there's not a place to plug in a flash sync cord except the bottom. This really isn't an issue because you can put your D90 in commander mode and control the SB-600 wirelessly and it meters through the lens to set flash output (Nikon's wireless flash control is really amazing to me).

Do you mean that the Sb-600 can be controlled by a wireless controller like Nikon ML-L3 Wireless Remote Control ?

Posted 3 years ago #