Nikon D100 lens choice

[Rhod]

I'm sure this is the kind of question that makes experienced users throw up their hands in despair   , but I have a Nikon D200 (I know the post title says D100 but I messed up and can't figure out how to change it) which I've had for several years.  I know it's out of date now, but I like it and anyway I can't afford to update it because...  I want to get a good lens (or two) instead of the standard zoom I'm using that came off my even older Nikon F100.

I know this is a question fraught with difficulty but could you recommend a good lens for landscape work (which is what I mostly do) with some (mostly family) portraiture on the side.  The ability to close focus for flowers etc would also be good but is not essential.  Even if I should be considering a suite of several lenses, could you recommend the ideal one to start with given what I've written above?

Many thanks (I'm going to duck now...  )

[jasonrandolph]

First off, don't be dissing the D200!     I still use mine regularly, and other than a shutter replacement due to operator error (mine), it still works like it did the day I opened the box.  I still like the image quality at low ISO.

As for lenses, it really depends on your budget.  If you have the bucks to spend, the 24-70mm f/2.8 is an incredible beast.  But I chose that because I'm moving to FX this year.  If you plan on staying on the DX side, the 17-55mm f/2.8 is supposed to be really good.  I hear the 16-85mm is a cheaper option that is still pretty sharp with a larger range.  If you're looking for a good wide angle lens, I use the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8.  That one is a great lens too, and worth the price.  If you need a good prime lens, the 35mm f/1.8 is the DX equivalent of a "normal" focal length lens.  It's good.  And then, of course, there's the 18-200mm VR super zoom that isn't the best optical performer, but it's versatile and the results aren't too bad.  I still use mine occasionally, until I decide to sell it.  Hope this helps.

[Larry451]

If you want and can afford  "sharp"..
Zeiss  100mm F2 macro
Zeiss   50mm  F2 macro

http://diglloyd.com/zf/index.html

good luck
Larry.

[Rhod]

First off, don't be dissing the D200!     I still use mine regularly, and other than a shutter replacement due to operator error (mine), it still works like it did the day I opened the box.  I still like the image quality at low ISO.

As for lenses, it really depends on your budget.  If you have the bucks to spend, the 24-70mm f/2.8 is an incredible beast.  But I chose that because I'm moving to FX this year.  If you plan on staying on the DX side, the 17-55mm f/2.8 is supposed to be really good.  I hear the 16-85mm is a cheaper option that is still pretty sharp with a larger range.  If you're looking for a good wide angle lens, I use the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8.  That one is a great lens too, and worth the price.  If you need a good prime lens, the 35mm f/1.8 is the DX equivalent of a "normal" focal length lens.  It's good.  And then, of course, there's the 18-200mm VR super zoom that isn't the best optical performer, but it's versatile and the results aren't too bad.  I still use mine occasionally, until I decide to sell it.  Hope this helps.

Great stuff Jason - many thanks!  The 24-70mm f/2.8 is a bit (  ) beyond my budget but the 16-85 is doable.  I will read some reviews of it.  Hey, if you decide to sell your 18-200 drop me a PM!  I would love to go the FX route, but it's going to be a while yet!

Thanks
Rhod

[Scott O.]

Tthe D200 is an excellent camera, so don't be dissing it!  In thinking of Nikon lenses, you have a choice to make.  Do you get DX lenses, which are made for your sensor size?  Or get FX lenses, which are made for the full frame sensor but will work well with your camera.  Remember that the lens will outlast several/many camera bodies, so you sort of need to predict your future needs by 10 or so years.  Personally, I would be inclined to go with the FX lens so there would not be a need to upgrade lenses in the future.  Start by making that decision and then worry about which specific lens might be best for your situation.

[Rhod]

Tthe D200 is an excellent camera, so don't be dissing it!  In thinking of Nikon lenses, you have a choice to make.  Do you get DX lenses, which are made for your sensor size?  Or get FX lenses, which are made for the full frame sensor but will work well with your camera.  Remember that the lens will outlast several/many camera bodies, so you sort of need to predict your future needs by 10 or so years.  Personally, I would be inclined to go with the FX lens so there would not be a need to upgrade lenses in the future.  Start by making that decision and then worry about which specific lens might be best for your situation.

Thanks for that advice - I'm very happy with the D200 (not much option really for the foreseeable future ) but I would like to begin to build a collection of lenses.  You make an excellent point and it's clear that FX is the way to go.

[Rhod]

If you want and can afford  "sharp"..
Zeiss  100mm F2 macro
Zeiss   50mm  F2 macro

http://diglloyd.com/zf/index.html

good luck
Larry.

Thanks Larry!  I only wish I could afford one (never mind two).  Interesting (and surprising) to note from a review I read that they are made by Cosina in Japan not Zeiss; but I also read that they are superb optically.  Maybe one day...

[Rhod]

Just out of interest, can I rephrase this question slightly...  What if I want the best possible optical quality at the lowest possible price?  I'm into landscape photography after all, so there is rarely any rush - no need for autofocus and all the other bells and whistles that come with modern lenses, so whether prime or zoom I'd like to hear your recommendations.

Thanks

Rhod