Recommend All-Around Lens for Nikon D90

the.ronin

Established
Local time
11:30 PM
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
112
I'd like to get a nicer all-around lens to replace the kit 18-55mm. I'm thinking maybe a wide angle 2.8-ish that will allow for good portrait and landscape shots.

Currently, I have the Nikkor 18-55 kit, a Nikkor 50mm prime, a Nikkor 75-300 (f4.5 old version) , and a Rokinon fisheye.

Specifically I have a trip to Hawaii coming up and wanted something I can leave on the camera to replace the kit 18-55.

Price-wise, I would like to keep it in the $200-ish range, "grey" market, used, refurbished is fine and may be preferable.

Any advice greatly appreciated!
 
35/1.8 AF-G is a great lens that'll have a ~50mm equiv f.l. Unfortunately, there isn't a cheap 35mm equiv AF prime available for APS-C Nikon.
 
Maybe the Sigma 17-70? There are more then one version of it. With or without shake reduction. Not much wider, but, compact and well regarded, and starts at f2.8. There are not many lenses that is much wider or faster than that and go up to normal or short tele. Maybe the new Tokina 12-28, but it's the longest superwide to about normal focal lenghs. Also there is Tokina 16-50 f2.8 constant, but kinda heavy and big. Both Tokina's blow your budget. Since you already have telephoto, i'd not recomend you to get any 18-200(300). Big, heavy expensive.

Best of luck.
 
35/1.8 AF-G is a great lens that'll have a ~50mm equiv f.l. Unfortunately, there isn't a cheap 35mm equiv AF prime available for APS-C Nikon.

I concur regarding the 35/1.8... GREAT lens and CHEAP!! If I went back to an APS-C type Nikon body, this is the first lens I'd buy. Its even "weather resistant"... one of the few such lenses for the APS-C bodies!
 
Thanks for the recommendations guys. $200 is the sweet spot for sure but I could go to $300.

That Sigma 17-70 looks very tempting even at its price range well above my budget. It seems to be exactly what I was looking for.

How much different would a 35mm be vs. my 50mm f1.8? I do love my 50mm prime and often have that on my camera over the kit 18-55.
 
How much different would a 35mm be vs. my 50mm f1.8?

A wider lens is arguably more versatile. A quick example - if you're indoors, and you're taking pics, with a wide prime, you can always "zoom in" by walking forwards, but "zooming out" can often be prevented by those pesky walls 😉
 
Back
Top Bottom