# Lense for D3000



## smyrk (Sep 25, 2009)

Hi i got a nikon d3000 for christmas and am getting to grips with it. I am looking at getting a new lense, i tend to take more portrait photos, but then also would like a bigger lense than the 18-55 kit lense ive got now. 
Could someone give me abit of advise on what sort of lense i should look for.


----------



## Dan J (Jun 18, 2008)

nikon 50mm lens for portrait stuff, i love mine you can pick them up from around £55/75 second hand.
55-200 zoom lens.


----------



## Supermega (Nov 10, 2008)

The Nikon 50mm F1.8 is a bargain..... but your camera will not auto focus it.... You can use it with manual focus tho. Or you could look at the 35mm F1.8 AFS that will auto as the focus motor is built into the lense. AFS is the key when looking at lenses for your camera. This was my main reason of upgrading to a D90 from my D40. Im not sure how much the 50mm F1.8 AFS is.


----------



## Guest (Jan 31, 2011)

As above really. I think it is really a choice between the 55-200 VR or a fast prime. 
I have a D40 (with the standard 18-55 kit lense). In the end I plumped for the Nikkor 55-200 VR, and I'm very pleased with it. However, I now want a fast prime for better DOF.

As already said, whatever you go for make sure the lense has an auto-focus motor built into it as the D3000 doesn't have one of its own.


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

Supermega said:


> The Nikon 50mm F1.8 is a bargain..... but your camera will not auto focus it.... You can use it with manual focus tho. Or you could look at the 35mm F1.8 AFS that will auto as the focus motor is built into the lense. AFS is the key when looking at lenses for your camera. This was my main reason of upgrading to a D90 from my D40. Im not sure how much the 50mm F1.8 AFS is.


The 50mm 1.4af-s is £300 and my 35mm f1.8 was £169 i think. Thats not the best price but a guide.
Phil


----------



## Ebbe J (Jun 18, 2008)

A bigger lens? Just by size or mm? 

I like fast primelenses, but they're not for everyone - the Nikon 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 G AF-S VR IF-ED is getting quite a few good recommendations, and it's not that expensive. Otherwise I would go for the AF-S 50mm 1.4G - it's a bargain for what you get. Autofocus isn't 'super fast', but it's okay.


Kind regards,

Ebbe


----------



## Pezza4u (Jun 7, 2007)

Eventually when/if I ever get the cash I want the following to replace my 15-55 (kit) lens and the 55-200, which is very good I might add but I want more zoom.

18-70mm
70-300mm
35mm prime

All for my D5000 so needs AFS as well.


----------



## Gruffs (Dec 10, 2007)

All day long the next lens for you should be the AF-S 35mm f1.8. It's cheaper and works well for portrait, landscape and shallow DOF images. It's very versatile. You just can't zoom with it. 

The AF-S 55-200mm VR is good for extending your range though if you can.

You are limited to AF-S Designation lenses if you want autofocus (basically any new lens).


----------



## pooma (Apr 12, 2008)

Not Nikon, but on my sony I had the money for one or the other and went for a 70-300.
Upto now I'm wishing I'd got the prime instead but I haven't really had the chance to get out with my new lens.
My next purchase will definitely be a faster lens.


----------



## bert1e (Apr 28, 2010)

In addition to the 55-200 lens there is also a 55-300VR lens that might be worth investigating. 

I have heard the 35mm lens is excellent but not used it myself. Try with your 18-55 kit lens setting it to 35mm and see if you can get close enough to your subject and see if you like the image.


----------



## Supermega (Nov 10, 2008)

My old man has got the 55-200 AFS its cracking lense for the cash. I did pickup the 18-105 for my D40 last year, I found I used that for most things - just got that bit over the 18-55 kit. I was amazed that the D5000 didnt have the focus motor built in, its not a cheap camera at all!


----------



## Supermega (Nov 10, 2008)

bert1e said:


> In addition to the 55-200 lens there is also a 55-300VR lens that might be worth investigating.
> 
> I have heard the 35mm lens is excellent but not used it myself. Try with your 18-55 kit lens setting it to 35mm and see if you can get close enough to your subject and see if you like the image.


I see what you are saying, but the 35mm will go down to F1.8 where as the kit will only get down to F3.5 i think?


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

smyrk said:


> Hi i got a nikon d3000 for christmas and am getting to grips with it. I am looking at getting a new lense, i tend to take more portrait photos, but then also would like a bigger lense than the 18-55 kit lense ive got now.
> Could someone give me abit of advise on what sort of lense i should look for.


How much money do you have/want to spend? I have the D5000 and have a few of the lenses you may be thinking of.
I have the 35 mm f1.8 prime which i love. I like the bokeh and shallow depth of field it allows. 


















I also have the 55-200 AF-S which i picked up from an Ebay shop for around £120 new. I havnt used it much to be fair but i really like it when i have used it.









The lens i use the most is the 18-70 AF-S which i got used off ebay for a crazy £77! Its a cracking lens and highly sought after. Normally £300 until Jessops were selling them for £150 which brought the used price down but when i was buying mine they were still going for £130 used. It doesnt have Image Stabilisation but i dont think its needed at this focal length.




























Hope this helps, Phil


----------



## smyrk (Sep 25, 2009)

thanks for all the suggestions i tottally forgot id started this thread.
I am looking at the 35mm 1.8 and the 55-200mm now.
just one last question how much differece is there between the 1.4 and the 1.8 i know the 1.4 is alot more expensive just wondered photo difference


----------



## Supermega (Nov 10, 2008)

smyrk said:


> thanks for all the suggestions i tottally forgot id started this thread.
> I am looking at the 35mm 1.8 and the 55-200mm now.
> just one last question how much differece is there between the 1.4 and the 1.8 i know the 1.4 is alot more expensive just wondered photo difference


Those would be my choices 

As for the difference between F1.4 and F1.8, I have not used the f.4 - but I can tell you that f1.8 it can be pretty critical where your focus point is. Have a look at flickr im sure you will get a better idea.

Best of luck


----------



## dubnut71 (Jul 25, 2006)

Spend the maximum amount of money you can possibly afford, thats my advice, go for the f1.4 there is a difference. And its Lens not Lense if that helps along the way with your discussion in a camera shop.

Its more expensive because there is a considerable amount more glass in the construction (elements) and its a superb piece of photographic kit.


----------



## Guest (Feb 5, 2011)

smyrk said:


> thanks for all the suggestions i tottally forgot id started this thread.
> I am looking at the 35mm 1.8 and the 55-200mm now.
> just one last question how much differece is there between the 1.4 and the 1.8 i know the 1.4 is alot more expensive just wondered photo difference


www.camerapricebuster.co.uk is a useful site for searching out good deals on gear. It is currently listing the 35mm f1.8 for £160 and the 35mm f1.4 for £1400. I'd go for the f1.8, unless money is no object .

Also, www.kenrockwell.com is good for reviews. He tends to be pretty honest about what he thinks. http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikkor.htm - scroll about half way down the page for the Nikon 35mm lense reviews.


----------



## Jonay (Nov 17, 2010)

smyrk said:


> thanks for all the suggestions i tottally forgot id started this thread.
> I am looking at the 35mm 1.8 and the 55-200mm now.
> just one last question how much differece is there between the 1.4 and the 1.8 i know the 1.4 is alot more expensive just wondered photo difference


PM inbound


----------



## Katana (Mar 31, 2007)

I have a D5000 and i got the 35mm f/1.8 and the 55-200mm VR, those and the 18-55mm should be all you'll need. I still use the 18-55mm the most, 35mm after that, and the 55-200 is useful but rarely used (was only £120 so i got it anyway).

A lot of people go for the 35mm f/1.8 so they can mess about with cliche bokeh shots, which is fine, done plenty myself, but i'll also add the images it takes are noticeably sharper than the 18-55mm kit lens. The kit lens is still good though providing you keep it f/9 or under to avoid diffraction. The 55-200 is on par with the kit lens for sharpness, also zoomed out and up close it can produce bokeh on par with the 35mm f/1.8; it's also useful for portraits where 85mm or higher is preferred for a more flattering perspective.

I got my 35mm f/1.8 from Jessops (was cheaper even than ebay, amazon and other places) and the 55-200mm from ebay.

Here's a few examples, click to go to flickr, bigger sizes available there.


Taken with 35mm f/1.8


Taken with 35mm f/1.8 (Bokeh test)


Taken with 55-200mm at 200mm.


----------

