Lens Advice for Nikon D5100

Greetings, photo enthusiasts of the forums! I'd like to request your advice on what lenses I should buy to go along with the new camera I've decided on purchasing.

 

My background is exclusively point-n-shoot with inexpensive cameras, so I'm learning as I go when it comes to anything more complex than that. My reason for upgrading is that I am tired of having to fix every picture in Photoshop before it's presentable (has my old camera degraded over the years?), and that it's hard to take pictures indoors or at night. After considering various new cameras, I am specifically looking to purchase a Nikon D5100.

 

Because this is my first camera that has interchangeable lenses, I have no idea what lenses I need to have to go with it in order to get the results I'm looking for. I can buy the D5100 with no lens, or in bundles with various Nikkor brand lenses, but I'm not sure what's going to do the job. I have access to Bic and Yodobashi Camera stores, so finding the equipment should be easy once I know what it is I need to look for.

 

Here's what I'm looking to do with the camera, primarily:

 

1) Photograph wildlife, either in a zoo or something like backyard birds in the neighborhood. I imagine this to be both outside in sunlight (most of the time), and occasionally very very low light conditions like nocturnal animal houses.

2) General touristy photographs, like forests, crowds of people, anime con cosplayers, signs. Just like pointing and shooting.

3) Photograph dolls in focus at close range, as well as from several feet away to capture a whole scene. Mostly this requirement will be indoors with normal room (e.g. not great) lighting. It'd be nice to have a lightbox eventually for specific staging, but I'll have to wait for that. This requirement could also include taking pictures of small items to sell on auction sites and the like.

 

I would be looking to spend maybe 20,000 yen or less per lens - unless there was a really really compelling reason to go over that amount for a beginner. (Maybe there is; I don't know).

 

With those things in mind, what types of lenses do I need? And would you have specific brand/model recommendations that give particularly good bang for the buck to go with the general kind-of-lens question?

i hasa d5100 with the kit 18-55 lens. it does decent job at pics. as seen on my figure fm posts. as for my photgraphy level im a complete beginner. that doesnt even know how to use the full potential of the camera(i have it on auto all the time). i like how the body is made from metal instead of canons plastic one(the 600d)

For backyard birds, I use a 55-300mm lens on my D5100. I find that I really need the extra zoom.

I'm personally in love with the 35mm 1.8, I use it pretty much 99% of the time.

I was about to recommend 2470N then I see that your budget is relatively low so I am going to recommend you a prime lens, specifically the 50mm 1.4/1.8 D. or the 35mm for eye level focal

There's simply no easy way to fulfill all the requirements.

You want different types of shooting, in different lighting and distance conditions - to cover this You will need several lenses and some fast ones too...

 

Step 1 - check the focal lengths You're using the most for Your photos (in 35mm equivalent)

You can use this - http://www.vandel.nl/exposureplot.html

Think, if You need something extra on the short or on the long end.

This will give You lens focal range to consider in later purchases.

 

For start, ie. general type shooting, I'd go with something universal like Nikkor 18-105VR. Inexpensive but decent enough general-purpose lens. To be honest, I'd go and search for used Nikkor 18-70 and spare few bucks for another lenses, preferably fixed focal ones.

Something like 70-300mm f/4-5.6G should be good when You will need the extra reach.

But with "not great light" nothing will help but fast lens (f/1.8 or less) or very high ISO.

Or a tripod. There are some laws of physics You just cannot break

There are very little fast and inexpensive lenses from Nikon. 50/1.8G and 35/1.8G are the notable exceptions, very worth buying. If You can afford 85/1.8G too then, well, why not

 

AntElitist tend to forget, that D5100 doesn't have AF motor so it won't autofocus with "D" lenses. And it's a DX camera.

24-70 is bulky, very expensive, not very wide on DX and in general not much better nor faster than used 150$ AF-S 18-70 for Your preferred use. This is a serious tool intended for a full frame.

 

And to be completely honest, today I wouldn't buy a DSLR at all.

Something like NEX-6 would be my first choice.

Oh yeah. D5100.

 

*sigh*

 

Kumi is right. Get a Nex 5/6

 

Much better.

I'm personally in love with the 35mm 1.8, I use it pretty much 99% of the time.

 

I have this one, too, but haven't had a chance to play much with it. This was a test:

 

sakura arrives 2 by PrettyCranium, on Flickr

 

Mostly I want to take pictures of my backyard birds, and I really need the zoom lens for those.

 

I also picked up a "micro" lens (I guess what Nikon calls macro), but I'm having a hard time with the really shallow DOF. For example, I tried taking a picture of a pseudoscorpion:

 

_DSC0868 by PrettyCranium, on Flickr

 

... and while his body is in focus, his pinchers aren't. Any tips for getting a deeper DOF? Another example:

 

_DSC0944 (2) by PrettyCranium, on Flickr

 

How can I get a nice close-up with a deeper depth of field? The lens I am using now is an AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR 85mm f/3.5G ED VR.

 

I'm actually finding the 55-300mm better for close-up sometime:

 

Leaf with snow by PrettyCranium, on Flickr

 

And I love it for birds, but I need to get a good tripod set up due to hand-shakiness. This is the best pic I think I've taken:

 

Cropped bird pic by PrettyCranium, on Flickr

 

Sorry for hijacking the thread, but since I also have the D5100, I thought I could ask other lens questions. Thanks for your help!

How can I get a nice close-up with a deeper depth of field? The lens I am using now is an AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR 85mm f/3.5G ED VR.

 

Well... I was mentioning something about unbreakable law of physics...

 

DOF it's a function of focal length, aperture and distance.

The DOF area is a fraction of the subject distance, little less in front than behind.

But when distance is becoming shorter, the DOF is also becoming more shallow.

To increase it You can close the aperture, but this cuts off the light - either You should use much more light or much longer exposure time (tripod again...)

If You try http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html You will see, that Nikon DX for say 50mm/1.8 lens and 50cm subject distance (not very close-up) will have only 0.64cm DOF. Closing the lens to f/8 will extend the DOF to only 2.9cm - and it will already require 16 times more light.

 

Similar calculation for 85/3.5 and 50cm shows 0.41cm and 0.9cm respectively. To achieve as little as 2.6cm DOF You should close the lens to f/22... Macro work requires LOTS of light. And tripod

 

You can sometimes be much better off making the shot from further distance (more DOF from the same aperture) and then cropping the final result.

Also, shorter lenses have bigger DOF.

Another option is to use focus stacking techniques, but it's limited to "motionless" subjects.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/focus-stacking.htm

How can I get a nice close-up with a deeper depth of field? The lens I am using now is an AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR 85mm f/3.5G ED VR.

 

Well... I was mentioning something about unbreakable law of physics...

 

DOF it's a function of focal length, aperture and distance.

The DOF area is a fraction of the subject distance, little less in front than behind.

But when distance is becoming shorter, the DOF is also becoming more shallow.

To increase it You can close the aperture, but this cuts off the light - either You should use much more light or much longer exposure time (tripod again...)

If You try http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html You will see, that Nikon DX for say 50mm/1.8 lens and 50cm subject distance (not very close-up) will have only 0.64cm DOF. Closing the lens to f/8 will extend the DOF to only 2.9cm - and it will already require 16 times more light.

 

Similar calculation for 85/3.5 and 50cm shows 0.41cm and 0.9cm respectively. To achieve as little as 2.6cm DOF You should close the lens to f/22... Macro work requires LOTS of light. And tripod

 

You can sometimes be much better off making the shot from further distance (more DOF from the same aperture) and then cropping the final result.

Also, shorter lenses have bigger DOF.

Another option is to use focus stacking techniques, but it's limited to "motionless" subjects.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/focus-stacking.htm

 

Thanks for the info. I'm interested in taking insect pictures, so increasing the light won't be possible, plus, they move! I'll take a look at the sites that you mentioned.

I'm interested in taking insect pictures, so increasing the light won't be possible, plus, they move!

That's what flashes are for.

I'm interested in taking insect pictures, so increasing the light won't be possible, plus, they move!

That's what flashes are for.

 

A good point, d'oh! I know very little about flashes, but I should try to learn about them. I guess I never thought about using a flash outside in the daylight!

 

Any good resources for a flash newbie? I don't have an external flash right now.

for macro you definitely need flashes. and open your aperture to almost the narrowest like f/22 and above

for macro you definitely need flashes. and open your aperture to almost the narrowest like f/22 and above

 

AntElitist, please take more care what You write about...

 

To f/22 one should close the aperture, because it's a very small one in diameter. Much less light, but the narrow "path of light" creates much bigger DOF.

To let more light through the lens, one need to open the aperture - to the numbers like f/2.8 or f/1.8 (depending of the lens "speed" - the maximum aperture diameter / minimum f-number)

Confusion is from the fact, that aperture number is in fact the denominator and the bigger the number, the smaller the aperture.

 

But ironically, for the macro work camera like DSLR is much worse than a good point-n-shoot. Again, laws of physics

 

DOF is related to the focal length - the "shorter" the lens, the bigger DOF for the same aperture and distance. But it's related to the real focal length, not the equivalent.

This means, that any P&S with real lens like 8.5mm will have much more DOF than a big DSLR with 85mm one...

Check the mentioned online DOF calculator.

On P&S You can use lower ISO and use smaller f-numbers, the field of view remains the same, DOF will be much bigger, but You will probably trade off some picture quality.

On DSLR You will need higher ISO, more light and higher f-numbers. But the final results may be worth it.

 

Just checked the numbers for my own Nikon D40 and Olympus C5050Z - same 50cm distance, f/8 and equivalent of 75mm lens (50mm on D40 and ~15mm on Oly). Nikon has ~2.9cm, Olympus over 10cm...

 

***

 

For the flash photography around the clock - http://strobist.blogspot.com/

Another option is to use a LED video lighting setup.

 

***

Thanks again. Interestingly, I found another pseudoscorpion today and tried taking some pics with my macro lens and the aperature much smaller (and the bulit-in flash). I'll upload them today and see what I've gotten. Odd to find another pseudoscorpion right after talking about them, they are shy creatures!

for macro you definitely need flashes. and open your aperture to almost the narrowest like f/22 and above

 

AntElitist, please take more care what You write about...

 

for macro you definitely need flashes. and open your aperture to almost the narrowest like f/22 and above

 

I am pretty sure as hell I had written narrowest.

 

Because in a sense, you still have to open your aperture settings on your camera.

 

Thanks again. Interestingly, I found another pseudoscorpion today and tried taking some pics with my macro lens and the aperature much smaller (and the bulit-in flash). I'll upload them today and see what I've gotten. Odd to find another pseudoscorpion right after talking about them, they are shy creatures!

Here we only have "interesting" things like butterflies. Haha.

You cannot open something to it's narrowest state

You cannot open something to it's narrowest state

that *open* refers to camera settings.

 

anyway, why are we even discussing English here? PC definitely know what we are referring.to

English is my third language but I still try to use it without any errors.

Opening/closing aperture is always related only to the aperture itself.

Take a classic film camera and there are no menu settings, only the aperture ring

 

 

In any case I hope, that all this shed a little light to this lens problem

Well, I did understand what was meant.

 

Here are some of the new pics:

 

Pseudoscorpion by PrettyCranium, on Flickr

 

Pseudoscorpion by PrettyCranium, on Flickr

 

Pseudoscorpion by PrettyCranium, on Flickr

 

I also got some nice close-ups of a backyard visitor:

 

Chipmunk by PrettyCranium, on Flickr

 

Chipmunk by PrettyCranium, on Flickr

where do you find all these scorpions. and can that chipmunk sing?

where do you find all these scorpions. and can that chipmunk sing?

 

They are pseudoscorpions. This one was about 2mm in size. They are tiny house arachnids that eat the mites in your home:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscorpion

 

This one was hanging out in a bathroom.

 

The chipmunk didn't sing for me, sadly.

Thanks for your advice and suggestions! I've read through the discussion, and although I am still working towards understanding all of it, I would like to ask some follow-up questions. Some of these are bound to seem pretty dumb to the experienced folks, but please bear with my caveman "me point camera, me press button, me get picture" level of understanding .

 

I do fully expect to have to buy several lenses in order to do all the things I want to do with the camera. This is no problem! Hence this thread.

 

1) So, the difference between an 18-55mm (kit lens) and 55-300mm lens is the level of zoom available? I notice that those two ranges don't overlap, so I guess the latter one is a telephoto lens designed for taking distance pictures, and when I want to take regular-distance pictures is the time I would swap out the lens back to the regular kit one? So is it worth getting the kit one as a general-purpose lens then?

 

2) What kind of pictures does waha's 35mm 1.8 favorite help me take? Is this the one for close-up shots with indoor lighting (I think because of 1.8 as a speed rating)? Would this also be the one to use in nocturnal animal houses?

 

3) Sidebar: I see that the NEX-6 is a point-n-shoot (I think?) from Sony. It surprises me to hear this recommended over a DSLR, and I am curious as to why it's a good choice. Can it do all the things I want to use a camera for as outlined in the OP? I'll still be looking at D5100 lenses for the time being, but maybe I missed something critical in my research.

 

4) Is PrettyCranium's "micro" lens for the pseudoscorpions different from the other lenses named previously? In reply to another comment Kumi made, why would a good point-n-shoot outpace a DSLR in this department?

 

5) Would it be helpful to buy an external flash right away, or is that something that can wait until later so I have a bigger budget for the lenses? I think I read that there is a small one built-in so maybe it can suffice at first.

 

Thanks for the discussion to all and for the example / experimentation shots, PC!

2) What kind of pictures does waha's 35mm 1.8 favorite help me take? Is this the one for close-up shots with indoor lighting (I think because of 1.8 as a speed rating)? Would this also be the one to use in nocturnal animal houses?

 

What I like about the 35mm is that it works for most everything, except for those times when you really want to zoom in on a far away object. Usually it's just a matter of taking a few steps backward or forward. It's great for street photography, and for portraits. I use it for pretty much 99% of all my indoor shots, and 100% of my outdoor shots.

 

5) Would it be helpful to buy an external flash right away, or is that something that can wait until later so I have a bigger budget for the lenses? I think I read that there is a small one built-in so maybe it can suffice at first.

 

Personally I find the built-in flash to be completely rubbish on the D5100 due to it being head-on. I initially got the SB-400 flash for it because it was cheap, and it can be angled upward so you can bounce the flash instead. DDs tend to look really bad with head-on flash, especially the wigs >_>

 

These days I use a SB-700 and a SB-910, but they're absolutely no flashes I'd ever want to take with me outside due to the weight/etc. So the SB-400 is a great option there.

1) To be precise, it's a range of focal lengths, but in general - yes, You're right.

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Learn-And-Explore/Article/g3cu6o2o/Understanding-Focal-Length.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_length

 

Zoom level or range is imo more related to the difference between min and max focal length, so a 18-55 lens has a 55/18 = 3x zoom range. And a 18-200 lens has a ~11x zoom range.

18-55 is a general-purpose zoom lens but there are more in this area. Like the 18-105, 18-135 or the mentioned Nikkor 18-70/3.5-4.5 - I have it, very good lens, and has some advantages over 18-55, like a little better build and bigger range with more light.

Plus, the front element does not rotate while focusing (in 18-55 does rotate), so it's much easier to use a polarizing filter.

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Learn-And-Explore/Article/gl1uy3i0/polarizing-filters-add-pow-to-pictures.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarizing_filter_(photography)

 

You can also buy "I can replace a whole bag of lenses" zoom like 18-200VR and be happy with it probably for the 95% of the time

Or the very expensive, but fast Nikor 17-55/2.8. Or some non-brand ones, like Tokina, Sigma or Tamron.

Many options, for D5100 only little limited to the lenses with built-in AF motor. Remember this.

 

2) Like waha said, probably almost everything.

Thing is, that focal length ~equal to the diagonal of the frame is considered "normal" and has similar perspective view like the human eye. For 35mm camera it's ~43mm (many SLR cameras some years ago had 50mm lens attached) and for DX camera it's ~30mm - so the 35/1.8 is the equivalent of former "standard 50mm lens".

 

You probably have some camera with zoom right now, or You can borrow one - try to set it to some standard focal lengths in the 35mm equvalents - like 28, 35, 50, 70, 90, 105, 135 - and check the field of view and the perspective, because every one will be different.

Or just go to some shop and try a Nikon with 35mm lens.

 

3) NEX-6 is not a p&s, it's a compact system camera http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-nex-6

Has exactly the same sensor as in D5100 (16.1MP APS-C CMOS sensor, ISO 100-25600) and possibility to change lenses (the choice is still growing). Also, is significantly smaller and lighter than Nikon.

It's viewfinder is electronic - 2.3 million dot OLED EVF - and it's bigger than Nikon's

Go to nearest Sony Centre, they will definitely have one on display and try it too.

Just now with 16-50 zoom You can do the P&S style shooting, and use the 50/1.8 for dolls, for example.

This is a fast, short telephoto lens so probably also good for animals.

The telephoto range is somewhat limited atm, there are 50-210 and not bad universal 18-200 lenses.

 

4) "Micro" is the Nikon's name for macro lenses, like PC said. Macro lenses have smaller minimum focus distance, even several cm - many "longer" lenses (telephoto primes/zooms) have close focus distance like 1m or more.

If You want to photograph dolls You should be aware of this. Because the dolls are smaller than humans (1/3 scale), for similar perspective we have to be 3 times closer... and sometimes it's too close for normal lens to focus properly (But You can overcome this using macro adapter ring/extension tube).

 

In general, digital p&s spare the user a LOT of hassle which one has to know when using more advanced gear...

 

5) D5100 (and other cameras with this sensor, like the NEXes) has a great high ISO performance. With a fast lens You may be perfectly fine without flash. Like waha said, small unit with bounce option may be good for a start.

And if you want to do something creative with flash lighting, You will need at least two bigger units with wireless triggering. Unfortunately, D5100 internal flash cannot act as a master fro Nikon CLS

http://support.nikonusa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/9520/~/nikon-creative-lighting-system-(cls)

http://www.nikoncls.com/

So for later I'd suggest to buy two (or more) flashguns with adjustable power (not necessarily Nikon) and a set of radio triggers.

Refer to http://strobist.blogspot.com/