New camera for new shooter?

[IBIubbleTea]

Hello,

 

Being one who wants to get into photography, do you guys think it's worth getting a refurbished D7100 currently or should I look at other options? I plan on mostly photos of course and some video on the side. Also I was wondering what lens I should consider getting, do you guys think the 18-140mm is the best all rounder or should I consider others? Maybe a prime lens? 

 

Thanks.

 

Edit: As of right now I plan on shooting just normal family photos both indoors and outdoors, computer stuffs, street photography and maybe some sports mostly badminton. An alrounder is what I'm trying to say. Under $900CAD if possible.

[Blade of Grass]

D7100 is a great camera and should serve you very well. I've been doing photography for 4 years now and am currently shooting with a D7100, you can get some very good stuff out of it

 

Personally I am not a big fan of the longer zooms, while they can be convenient for shooting they tend to have lower image quality and can introduce bad habits. What type of photography are you planning on doing? 

[IBIubbleTea]

D7100 is a great camera and should serve you very well. I've been doing photography for 4 years now and am currently shooting with a D7100, you can get some very good stuff out of it

 

Personally I am not a big fan of the longer zooms, while they can be convenient for shooting they tend to have lower image quality and can introduce bad habits. What type of photography are you planning on doing? 

Currently I'm not quite sure what kind of photography I want to do. As of right now, just family photos, computer stuffs(if this is a thing, lel) and maybe some sports like badminton.

[Williamchan87]

I do not recommend you getting the, you should maybe get a few primes( 50 1.4/1.8, 35 1.4/1.8, 85 1.4/1.8, 105M 2.8) or the sigma 18-35.

[IBIubbleTea]

I do not recommend you getting the, you should maybe get a few primes( 50 1.4/1.8, 35 1.4/1.8, 85 1.4/1.8, 105M 2.8) or the sigma 18-35.

And these primes are good for taking pictures of people playing badminton? Like is it quick enough and what not when paired with the D7100? 

[Silvercall]

How much is your budget? That will determine what to recommend.

[IBIubbleTea]

How much is your budget? That will determine what to recommend.

Under 900CAD for lens(es)

[Williamchan87]

And these primes are good for taking pictures of people playing badminton? Like is it quick enough and what not when paired with the D7100? 

sorry those are lens mainly for regular usage, they are sure fast enough but won't give you enough tele, for badminton which probably will be indoors, and might have not enough light you might be able to find new but prob used nikon 300mm F/4D af-s, or the tokina 300mm f/2.8 at-x af pro(i've heard people getting this used at $500USD decently often) for around $900 USD

[IBIubbleTea]

sorry those are lens mainly for regular usage, they are sure fast enough but won't give you enough tele, for badminton which probably will be indoors, and might have not enough light you might be able to find new but prob used nikon 300mm F/4D af-s, or the tokina 300mm f/2.8 at-x af pro(i've heard people getting this used at $500USD decently often) for around $900 USD

When you mean not enough tele, do you mean not enough zoom?

I thought the 1.8 on the sigma 18-35 allowed enough light.

[Cocoabytes]

Hello,

 

Being one who wants to get into photography, do you guys think it's worth getting a refurbished D7100 currently or should I look at other options? I plan on mostly photos of course and some video on the side. Also I was wondering what lens I should consider getting, do you guys think the 18-140mm is the best all rounder or should I consider others? Maybe a prime lens? 

 

Thanks.

I am a new shooter as well (as of 5 months ago), and I bought a 7100 with telephoto lens (55-300mm) during the blackfriday sales in the US. I really love the camera, and have had no gripes. I shoot mostly outdoor pictures of my dog, and am looking to get into shooting pet photography professionally. I only regret having not spent a bit more money to purchase a full frame camera. If you have an specific question about the camera, just let me know.

[IBIubbleTea]

I am a new shooter as well (as of 5 months ago), and I bought a 7100 with telephoto lens (55-300mm) during the blackfriday sales in the US. I really love the camera, and have had no gripes. I shoot mostly outdoor pictures of my dog, and am looking to get into shooting pet photography professionally. I only regret having not spent a bit more money to purchase a full frame camera. If you have an specific question about the camera, just let me know.

Well then, as of right now I don't know what lens(es) to buy. I want to do stuff like family photos, computer stuffs and some badminton. Just a alrounder but idk If I can get them for under $900CAD.

[Brandonberg]

my 2c from someone who asked the exact same question about 2 years ago....

 

 

I have a D7100. Fantastic camera. For a new shooter, has everything you will need and then some. (i upgraded from a D3100 though)

 

I would suggest starting with a 18-140 or 18-105. Take some photos. Play around and then decide what your next lens is based on your needs.

 

- Primes are generally fast but not good for range.

 

- Telephoto lens are great for distance but not generally fast enough to get a high shutter speed for sports under low ISO.

 

- High end telephoto are great for sport, with low apertures but cost $$$$$.

 

 

The 18-140 is a great all rounder, Jack of all trades, master of none type lens. Buy the D7100 + 18-140 combo and then spend the rest on lenses down the line once you have a better idea of what you want. I can tell you what lens to buy, doesn't mean its what you need/want especially if you are not sure what photography you want to get into.

[IBIubbleTea]

my 2c from someone who asked the exact same question about 2 years ago....

 

 

I have a D7100. Fantastic camera. For a new shooter, has everything you will need and then some. (i upgraded from a D3100 though)

 

I would suggest starting with a 18-140 or 18-105. Take some photos. Play around and then decide what your next lens is based on your needs.

 

- Primes are generally fast but not good for range.

 

- Telephoto lens are great for distance but not generally fast enough to get a high shutter speed for sports under low ISO.

 

- High end telephoto are great for sport, with low apertures but cost $$$$$.

 

 

The 18-140 is a great all rounder, Jack of all trades, master of none type lens. Buy the D7100 + 18-140 combo and then spend the rest on lenses down the line once you have a better idea of what you want. I can tell you what lens to buy, doesn't mean its what you need/want especially if you are not sure what photography you want to get into.

I quite like the Sigma 18-35mm atm. Just unsure if it's good for badminton, when I mean badminton I mean like on the court taking pictures. ya or na? 

[Williamchan87]

When you mean not enough tele, do you mean not enough zoom?

I thought the 1.8 on the sigma 18-35 allowed enough light.

ok first tele means a large focal point (ie you can take a picture closer to the subject), a zoom is the movement to go from one focal point to another, so with that said theres 2 types of lens, a prime lens where you cannot change the focal point of the lens, except with your own legs etc, and a zoom lens, where you can zoom in and out.

1.8 does allow enough light, but unfortunately the is a 3.5-4.6, so the light would be alot less.

with the d7200 the 2 lens being 300mm FF, the actual focal length you will take will be 450 with APS-C being 1.5x

edit: actually thinking bout it more 450mm eq. might be too tele, the nikon 105mm 2.8micro, or the nikon 70-200 F4 used might be good choices, or the 135mm f2 samyang/rokinon is good if you dont mind using manual focus

I quite like the Sigma 18-35mm atm. Just unsure if it's good for badminton, when I mean badminton I mean like on the court taking pictures. ya or na?

The sigma 18-35 is a very nice lens, but it would be a bit short for sports unless you go very close to your subject, or you want a decent amount of back ground, or wanting to photograph both players in one picture

the Sigma 18-35mm is a crop lens, what you actually get is 35-50mm, It's a very standard street focal length

Edited April 12, 2015 by Blade of Grass

[bob345]

The sigma 18-35 is a very nice lens, but it would be a bit short for sports unless you go very close to your subject, or you want a decent amount of back ground, or wanting to photograph both players in one picture

 

the Sigma 18-35mm is a crop lens, what you actually get is 35-50mm, It's a very standard street focal length

the 18-35 on a crop sesor is actually more like a 27-52mm + or - a bit depending on if you use canon or nikon so you still do get a decent wide angle

[IBIubbleTea]

ok first tele means a large focal point (ie you can take a picture closer to the subject), a zoom is the movement to go from one focal point to another, so with that said theres 2 types of lens, a prime lens where you cannot change the focal point of the lens, except with your own legs etc, and a zoom lens, where you can zoom in and out.

 

1.8 does allow enough light, but unfortunately the is a 3.5-4.6, so the light would be alot less.

 

with the d7200 the 2 lens being 300mm FF, the actual focal length you will take will be 450 with APS-C being 1.5x

 

edit: actually thinking bout it more 450mm eq. might be too tele, the nikon 105mm 2.8micro, or the nikon 70-200 F4 used might be good choices, or the 135mm f2 samyang/rokinon is good if you dont mind using manual focus

Proof read is always nice.

I don't quite get what you mean "1.8 does allow enough light, but unfortunately the is a 3.5-4.6, so the light would be alot less." 3.5-4.6 On the sigma 1.8?

[Brandonberg]

Proof read is always nice.

I don't quite get what you mean "1.8 does allow enough light, but unfortunately the is a 3.5-4.6, so the light would be alot less." 3.5-4.6 On the sigma 1.8?

Ive tried to work it out. It gives me headaches.

The sigma 18-35 f/1.8 is a nice lens if you intend to shoot low light all the time and want wide angle/portrait range. Personally the cost is too high for me to ever justify buying it. The reasons i would not purcase it for badmington would be the following;

- High Cost (your buying a constant aperture zoom)

- Wide angle, you would have to be very close to subject to get a decent fill in the frame.

- Using low aperture (which this lens is designed for) isn't always the best due to the low depth of field. I would be more inclined to run a higher aperture and higher ISO (which the D7100 is great at) for better depth of field in sport.

- I would assume lens is designed more for Travel (broad scenes in varying light), Events like weddings where light isn't always the best but you want to to get a wider frame.

I quite like the Sigma 18-35mm atm. Just unsure if it's good for badminton, when I mean badminton I mean like on the court taking pictures. ya or na?

Have a look at the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM.

Its a little cheaper, not as fast (aperture) but better zoom. I would probably couple it with a 55-200 or 55-300 for better telephoto shots and then you are really set.

If you decide to get into portraiture and the above doesn't cut it, I would go for a Nikon 35mm f/1.8 DX (DX crop sensor prime lens. probably my favourite lens)

or a Nikon 50mm f/1.8 D (full frame prime lens, no built in focus motor but still works fully with the D7100 due to the D7100's built in focus motor)

[IBIubbleTea]

Ive tried to work it out. It gives me headaches. 

 

The sigma 18-35 f/1.8 is a nice lens if you intend to shoot low light all the time and want wide angle/portrait range. Personally the cost is too high for me to ever justify buying it. The reasons i would not purcase it for badmington would be the following;

 

- High Cost (your buying a constant aperture zoom)

- Wide angle, you would have to be very close to subject to get a decent fill in the frame.

- Using low aperture (which this lens is designed for) isn't always the best due to the low depth of field. I would be more inclined to run a higher aperture and higher ISO (which the D7100 is great at) for better depth of field in sport.

- I would assume lens is designed more for Travel (broad scenes in varying light), Events like weddings where light isn't always the best but you want to to get a wider frame.

Would getting a Nikon 50mm be a better option or would I need to look at tele lenses?

[Brandonberg]

Would getting a Nikon 50mm be a better option or would I need to look at tele lenses?

 

Have a look at my second post above.

 

If you get a 17-70 and a 55-200 or 300, you cover most focal lengths you would ever need.

 

You already cover the range of the 50mm prime, the benefit to the prime lens is the faster aperture for portrait work, and generally better glass and optics.

Unless you specifically need these features, a 35mm or 50mm prime lens along with a 17-70 zoom is pretty much pointless.

 

 

I would still suggest with a single 17-70 or 18-140 zoom lens then buy the rest later as you decide what you need. But if I had to suggest three lenses now I would suggest the following;

 

Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM    (wide angle/general use/portrait)

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR      (zoom) (the Nikon AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED is a better lens but cost more as its a full frame lens)

 

 

And if you want a fast prime down the track;

Nikon 35mm f/1.8 DX

 

 

I am no expert on the matter, but this is my advice based on being a D7100 user for the past two years.

[Williamchan87]

the 18-35 on a crop sesor is actually more like a 27-52mm + or - a bit depending on if you use canon or nikon so you still do get a decent wide angle

sorry I forget it was actually 27-50 give or take.

 

Proof read is always nice.

I don't quite get what you mean "1.8 does allow enough light, but unfortunately the is a 3.5-4.6, so the light would be alot less." 3.5-4.6 On the sigma 1.8?

sorry the 18-140 you were looking at is F3.5-5.6

[IBIubbleTea]

Have a look at my second post above.

 

If you get a 17-70 and a 55-200 or 300, you cover most focal lengths you would ever need.

 

You already cover the range of the 50mm prime, the benefit to the prime lens is the faster aperture for portrait work, and generally better glass and optics.

Unless you specifically need these features, a 35mm or 50mm prime lens along with a 17-70 zoom is pretty much pointless.

 

 

I would still suggest with a single 17-70 or 18-140 zoom lens then buy the rest later as you decide what you need. But if I had to suggest three lenses now I would suggest the following;

 

Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM    (wide angle/general use/portrait)

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR      (zoom) (the Nikon AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED is a better lens but cost more as its a full frame lens)

 

 

And if you want a fast prime down the track;

Nikon 35mm f/1.8 DX

 

 

I am no expert on the matter, but this is my advice based on being a D7100 user for the past two years.

Okay, If i were to get the 17-70 and a 55-300. It's quite a bit over budget. What about just getting a 35mm?

 

Also kind of a noobie question, what use do I have for the 55-300 and the 70-300. Like what pictures would I be taking with those lenses? 

[Williamchan87]

Okay, If i were to get the 17-70 and a 55-300. It's quite a bit over budget. What about just getting a 35mm?

 

Also kind of a noobie question, what use do I have for the 55-300 and the 70-300. Like what pictures would I be taking with those lenses? 

in the 55-300 on a APS-C means you will take portraits, you can take pics of commercial passenger planes, some closer range sports, larger animals that probably domestic running around, and stalking people :\

[IBIubbleTea]

in the 55-300 on a APS-C means you will take portraits, you can take pics of commercial passenger planes, some closer range sports, larger animals that probably domestic running around, and stalking people :\

Just wondering but does a crop senor change the aperture like how it changes the zoom? 1.3x crop.

 

Also, for $800 do you think getting a Nikon 35mm 1.8 prime and a Nikon 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 be a good option? 

[Williamchan87]

Just wondering but does a crop senor change the aperture like how it changes the zoom? 1.3x crop.

 

Also, for $800 do you think getting a Nikon 35mm 1.8 prime and a Nikon 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 be a good option? 

It does change the aperture a bit, but you don't need to worry about that. and no the d7100 is not 1.3x crop, that is a APS-H, a d7100 is a aps-c which is 1.5x on all cameras except canon. 35mm 1.8 and 70300 4.5-5.6 for $800 is almost just brand new price, so if it isn't new then try to hassle it for cheaper

[IBIubbleTea]

It does change the aperture a bit, but you don't need to worry about that. and no the d7100 is not 1.3x crop, that is a APS-H, a d7100 is a aps-c which is 1.5x on all cameras except canon. 35mm 1.8 and 70300 4.5-5.6 for $800 is almost just brand new price, so if it isn't new then try to hassle it for cheaper

I'm buying the lenses new. Just wondering if this is the way to go.