Best Nikon Lens for 400.00

[bunyfofu69]

So Im upgrading glass instead of my body since someone else paid for my D300 and Im getting the 80-200 f2,8D, and a few other things that will help me light on location. Ill have roughly 400ish bucks left over and I think maybe another lens would be in order. So ... what is the best Nikon lens for 400ish bucks? (I have a 50mm AF-D) I mainly shoot landscapes, portraits, and nature. Also alot of really strange artistic stuff. Opinions?

EDIT: Sorry, I also own the 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 VR. I didnt realize I just posted the long end stuff.

No question 35-70 2.8. Can be had between $250-300.

 

[compuwar]

Your suggestion of the 60mm macro was actually a lens I have been considering. Although, there is no reason I can't sell the 18-200 and save up the rest for the 24-70, at which point I would be pretty much set for the range.

I have a 60mm Micro, you can occasionally low-ball bid them on eBay and I got one in very good condition that way- I wasn't actually looking for a new lens, but the bids were so low that I set a low high-bid and won. It's a good lens, but if you want to do a lot of non-copy macro work, you'd probably be better off with something that gives more working distance like a Tamron 90mm or one of the 105mms.

No question 35-70 2.8. Can be had between $250-300.

It's been at least 6-7 years since I've seen a good condition 35-70 f/2.8 AF-D go for less than $400. KEH lists them in the $450-550 range for EX and EX+ condition lenses.

Paul

 

[Ruahrc]

You also want to be careful on what ranges you shoot most. If you get a 24-70 but end up shooting a lot between say 16 and 50mm, you will have to constantly be switching lenses because to get wider than 24 you'll need to use the 12-24, and for anything longer you'll need to switch to the 24-70. If you find yourself shooting a lot at that range, the 17-55 might be better just as an example because it would involve less lens swapping.

Given any thought to the new 16-35 VR?

 

[schataut]

I recently got the Tokina 12-24 and absolutely love it. I paid 399 at B&H. Definitely check it out.

 

[schataut]

Why do people always recommend wide angle lenses for landscape photography?

For shots like this and similar you need wide angle lens.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_DcPQhVFFlJY/S4xmbDBpxOI/AAAAAAAABBQ/wQr3c-Mx90M/s1600-h/IMG_0315c.jpg

 

[dazey]

400 bucks could get you a nice Nikkor 28mm f/2 ai/ais manual focus lens I've got one and it is very nice.

How Much??! They saw you coming! I think I paid less than £100 for mine (although it is/was a pre-ai so required 5 mins with a metal file before it was usable). Not a bad lens but I prefer my radioactive 35mm f1.4 (which was more expensive, think I paid around £130 for it)

 

[pna]

I haven't seen mention in this thread of the tokina 11-16. I assume that's simply due to it being slightly out of the price range, or have folks here had unfavorable experiences with that lens?

 

[schataut]

I haven't seen mention in this thread of the tokina 11-16. I assume that's simply due to it being slightly out of the price range, or have folks here had unfavorable experiences with that lens?

From what I have read its an excellent lens, even better than the Tokina 12-24. However I went with 12-24 for 2 reason.

1. For landscape I don't need the 2.8.
2. 16 was just not long enough for me. I like the 12-24 range better than 11-16.

 

[Abraxsis]

Got both my lenses in this morning and went out shooting all afternoon/evening, and planning all morning tomorrow. Ill be sure to post some links to images. Below is a link to an image I shot this evening with the 12-24. Nothing spectacular, but if you read the description you'll see why I like it.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/23868612@N02/4407168653/

First impressions, the 12-24 is fantastic. A little soft in corners/sides at 12mm but not horribly so. Super sharp center across the whole range. For 399.00, I highly recommend it. I had never really shot with a wide angle (well, THAT wide angle) and it's amazing how big a difference the 6mm from the 18 on my 18-200 to the 12 on the 12-24. It's almost like looking nearly straight up through the viewfinder.

As for the 80-200 f/2.8 ... well, I don't think we really need little old me telling everyone that it's a kick ass lens, you all know it is just flat out excellent.