Camera Labs

Hi Everyone

I know that this topic has probably been covered numerous times over the past couple of months however my question to you all does not actually involve the D7000 directly but more the perfect set of lenses which should accompany it in regards to my particular photographic interests.

Over the past couple of years I have extensively borrowed friends and families Nikon D90's. During this time I have realized that I take a wide range of subjects in my Photography including fast moving sports like Rugby and Mountain Biking as well as Landscapes and Macro.
So to cover all these genres I am looking for a diverse lens collection which will cover my many interests. While I would love to be able to afford expensive lenses this is just not feasible for me at the moment so I am entertaining the idea of 3rd party lenses.

Here are the 3 lenses that I currently have my eye on. I have a general budget of $1300 USD for my lens collection and would like to keep somewhat within this range.

Nikon 35mm f1.8
Sigma 8-16mm f4.5-5.6 HSM
Nikon 70-300 f4.5-5.6 VR

I would love to get a Macro lens however at this point I do not see it being feasible. I also notice that there is a large gap in the focal length but I cannot see a lens which will appropriately cover this while still offering me the quality of the alternative. (I do not mind taking some steps forward and back with the 35mm)

I'm very excited about buying my own D7000 and would love to purchase all my gear before returning home to Australia very early next year where the equipment is far more expensive.

Any comments or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Cheers.

Welcome to the forums!

That's a great choice of lenses you have there, but there is a chance you will miss the convenience of a midrange zoom like the cheap and cheerful 18-105 VR.

However, you can take perfectly good pictures with the lens selection you have eyed, chances are you'll never want/need a midrange zoom.

If you look at my lens selection, you might notice the total absence of a midrange zoom (I sold my 18-105):

10mm fisheye
15-30mm F/4
35 F/1.8
50 F/1.4
70-200 F/2.8 + 2x teleconverter

_________________
I take pictures so quickly, my highschool was "Continuous High".

Thanks Citruspers

As you said I think that I will learn to compensate for the lack of mid range zoom with these three lenses.
Ideally I would love to get the Nikon 16-85mm VRII however I figure that I can purchase this if the need arises. Sigma also has a new lens the 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM which could fill this need and my desire to do Marco Photography in the future.

In regards to your personal lens collection which of the 2 prime lenses would you recommend getting? The 35mm or 50mm?
With the D7000 1.5x crop factor both of those lenses would represent perfect segments in between the Sigma and Nikkor Zooms. Both Camera Labs and Ken Rockwell score the 35mm very highly in there reviews.

Definitely get the 35, it's a more useful length imho. If I had to pick one lens to take with me for a day, it's the 35, hands down.

I think the 16-85 is somewhat overrated, the 18-105 or sigma 17-70 should be about equal (where the sigma has a big advantage at the wide end).

finally, keep in mind that sigma puts "macro" on pretty much every lens they produce, because they focus closer than average. It does not mean they are real macro lenses (they don't go down to 1:1, or even close to that).

That said, the 35 F/1.8 can focus pretty close actually

_________________
I take pictures so quickly, my highschool was "Continuous High".

Perfect,
Well these three lenses should do it then.

Nikon 35mm f1.8
Sigma 8-16mm f4.5-5.6 HSM
Nikon 70-300 f4.5-5.6 VR

They all have there faults (Sigma will not take Filters) But with everything that I have read they seem like a solid start and something that I can build and hone my skills with.

Cheers

cheers mate. One final thing, don't get suckered into buying UV filters (maybe for the 70-300 if you're paranoid about scratching the front glass), but definitely not for the 35 1.8

_________________
I take pictures so quickly, my highschool was "Continuous High".

I dont know about using UV filters, I have mixed opinions.

Looks nice!

Only thing I notice is that between 16 and 35mm is quite a long way, manageable, but there may be times you miss something in between.

_________________
Nikon D5000 and D300 with 12-24mm, 35mm f1.8, 50mm f1.4, 60mm f2.8 Macro, 18-200mm, 17-55mm f2.8 (all Nikon)

I do not think that I will use UV Filters, I was more thinking about polarizing filters on the wide angle lens.
In the Tutorials Section here on Camera Labs Gordon did a great segment on filters and it made me think that they might be very useful; not necessary but useful.
Do most people use filters or is Photoshop just as good with most of it?

Polarizers are special, they can not be mimicked as good by Photoshop, like doing it in real life. But regarding your wide-angle, the Sigma does not take filters, so that will be kind of a problem to get a polarizer on there. A rule also for polarizers, dont be cheap on buying them!

_________________
- Wout -
Lowepro Nova 200 AW filled with Nikon D90 + MB-D80
18-70 DX, 70-300 VR, 35 1.8 DX, SB-700

Yeah, get a multicoated polarizer, or suffer from massive flare (I bought an uncoated one to save money..stupid me). Didn't use it that much on my old 10-20

Then again, both my wides (10mm fish and 15-30mm) can't take filters, and I don't really miss it. Exposing for the sky, and adding some fill light in Lightroom gets you quite far.

_________________
I take pictures so quickly, my highschool was "Continuous High".

The biggest sales by far in filters is for lens protection not for actually filtering both UV and Polarized are popular.
UV's as they have almost no effect on exposure but obviously in brighter conditions neither do they help reduce flare, however conversly in low light the tint in a polarized filter can increase exposure. Its a bit of a catch 22 situation. For me personally I prefer UV and only use Polarization when required.

Hello

I have a B&W UV filter on all of my lenses, mainly for protection. It costs less to replace a less-than $100 filter than a $600 lens! However, filters such as polarizers not only provide protection, but also a reflection reduction and less haze. But a good, QUALITY polarizer can get some very good effects, it would be a wise investment.

_________________
-Evan

Gear: 7 Nikon Nikkor AI-S and AF-S lenses, SB-700 flash, Nikon D7000, Nikon FM, variety of accessories

"There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs."
- Ansel Adams