Good 2nd Lens for Beginner.

[Wacky Jackson]

Hello, I'm am fairly new into dslr photography and I was wondering what is a good 2nd lens for me. Right now I only have the kit lens that came with my D3000. I am looking for a zoom lens. Because the kit lens is only 18-55. For my budget, as previously stated I am a beginner so I don't need anything real expensive, $300 max. I will probably get a used lens to save money as well. Thanks for helping a noob.

 

[blockburner28]

Hello, I'm am fairly new into dslr photography and I was wondering what is a good 2nd lens for me. Right now I only have the kit lens that came with my D3000. I am looking for a zoom lens. Because the kit lens is only 18-55. For my budget, as previously stated I am a beginner so I don't need anything real expensive, $300 max. I will probably get a used lens to save money as well. Thanks for helping a noob.

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-55-200m...1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1272070899&sr=8-1 Nikon 55-200mm vr $230.99

there you go man. now you have 18-200mm with 2 lens btw on crop your 18-55mm is really 28-88mm and the 55-200 is really 88-320. So enjoy your range and congrats on your camera you will love it!

EDIT

you can also look into the nikon 50mm 1.8 lens. It's around $120 and razor sharp

These are some pictures that people have shot with your camera and the 50mm 1.8 lens

http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=nikon d3000 50mm 1.8&w=all

 

[toxic]

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-55-200m...1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1272070899&sr=8-1 Nikon 55-200mm vr $230.99

there you go man. now you have 18-200mm with 2 lens btw on crop your 18-55mm is really 28-88mm and the 55-200 is really 88-320. So enjoy your range and congrats on your camera you will love it!

an 18mm lens is an 18mm lens. it is not "really" anything other than an 18mm lens. spouting 35mm equivalents is pointless for anyone who hasn't shot 35mm film.

OP: I suggest the 55-200 or 35/1.8, depending on whether you'd like a zoom with more reach or a fast, fixed lens to play around with.

 

[MorganK]

I'd go with the 55-200 if you're looking for zoom.

Would also suggest a 50mm 1.8 to start--later can go for the 1.4. Nifty Fifty is awesome!

 

[dazey]

Your a beginner and looking for advice, I recommend going for a fast prime. I would go for the 35mm DX lens. You will learn a lot more by restricting yourself to one focal length and having a much wider aperture range.

 

[stagi]

I would go with a prime but which one really depends on what you are shooting?

 

[RHVC59]

I'd go with the 55-200 if you're looking for zoom.

Would also suggest a 50mm 1.8 to start--later can go for the 1.4. Nifty Fifty is awesome!

+1 for me... I have both

The 55-200 opens up the Telephoto world, which is fun, but it is not real fast and that can be frustrating some times. But it is fun.

The 1.4. 50 is truly a great lens, but out of your set price limit.

check the local camera stores, garage sales, etc to see what is out there used. I have some older film lenses that are great fun to shoot.

 

[Wacky Jackson]

Right now I am shooting a variety of things. So I am looking to get 3 lenses to start with for awhile. Should i get prime lens like the 35mm/50mm before I go for a zoom or vice versa? Thanks again.

 

[Wacky Jackson]

I was thinking about going for the 50mm 1.8 then saw that autofocus doesn't work with the D3000. So now it's going to be the 55-200 or 35 1.8

 

[Gold89]

What do you find limits your photography most at the moment? Lack of reach? Lack of light? Poor image quality? etc, etc.

People should upgrade when they find their kit limiting them, not just for the sake of upgrading.

 

[Wacky Jackson]

Well. I want to be able to take photos in local indoor concerts without using the flash and the kit lens isn't going to have the best quality doing that. Also I have interest in landscape as well, so I want to zoom more than kit lens.

 

[El Cabong]

Well. I want to be able to take photos in local indoor concerts without using the flash and the kit lens isn't going to have the best quality doing that. Also I have interest in landscape as well, so I want to zoom more than kit lens.

Then you want:
(1) A large aperture lens (35mm f/1.8 is probably the cheapest candidate that will autofocus on your camera, but there are several options).
(2) A lens that will "zoom more" for landscapes. Assuming you want wide-angle, there are a lot of options. The best bang for the buck is probably the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6.

A single lens will not do both of these things.

Be more specific in what is limiting your shooting and what kind of budget you have. Otherwise, responses to your question will continue to be all over the place, which tends to happen in these "What __________ should I buy?" threads that pop up every week.

 

[Wacky Jackson]

I know I will need more than one lens, I did state that earlier. And sorry for my terminology (zoom more), I meant as in for example a 55-200mm lens. I will be either getting the 35mm 1.8 or the 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED. Just which one to get first.

 

[toxic]

(2) A lens that will "zoom more" for landscapes. Assuming you want wide-angle, there are a lot of options. The best bang for the buck is probably the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6.

landscapes are not all taken with wides, let alone ultra-wides.

I know I will need more than one lens, I did state that earlier. And sorry for my terminology (zoom more), I meant as in for example a 55-200mm lens. I will be either getting the 35mm 1.8 or the 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED. Just which one to get first.

depends what you shoot more often. if neither occurs more often, the 55-200 is probably the safer choice. primes can be very fun or very frustrating, depending on how you like to shoot, since you can't zoom.

 

[El Cabong]

Since the two lenses that seem to be on your list are quite different in use, it's up to you to decide which you think you'll use more. I personally would go with the 35mm, but that's because I like shooting with a large aperture. For landscape photography, you generally don't need a very large max. aperture. Figure out what you want to shoot more, and the choice will be clear.

landscapes are not all taken with wides, let alone ultra-wides.

I'm aware of that; however, since the language implied either a wide zoom or a telephoto zoom (because he has the kit lens and stated that he wanted a different focal range), I guessed the one that people most associate with landscape photography.

 

[jdavtz]

Well. I want to be able to take photos in local indoor concerts without using the flash and the kit lens isn't going to have the best quality doing that...

This is probably the most difficult thing to buy a lens for. You need a fast f-stop cos there's usually poor lighting, and a longish lens to isolate people. This combination costs $$$ and can't be "helped" with image stabilization/vibration reduction as you're shooting moving objects. Something like a 200mm f/2 would be acceptably good, but don't even think of looking at prices of lenses in that category.

You're going to have to be creative to pull this off. Some way to get up close and use a lens between 35-100mm (prime, not zoom, I'm just giving the range that tends to have more realistic prices).

Personally - and FWIW I love 50mm on full frame which is about 30mm on your camera - I'd buy a fast (i.e. low f-stop) prime lens between 28-35mm and use that a lot.

OR you might manage your concert shots with something around 100mm f/2ish - I don't know if Nikon make a lens with that sort of specification.

All the best,
Jonathan.