Which is a better investment

[HiSpec]

I am pretty sure I am going to be purchasing a D90. However, I am stuck with two lens options here:

1) D90 body ($1057.47) + Nikkor 18-200mm ($778.68) = ~$1836

OR

2) D90 kit w/ 18-105 ($1360) + Prime lens (~$250?) + UV Filter (~$30?) = ~$1640

Which option do you think it will be the best investment?

Also, which prime lens would you guys recommend? I know I can't afford a f1.4 that's for sure!!

Thanks

[muse017]

What are you planing on shooting? Landscape, Indoor, kids, Outdoor activities etc?
Nikon 18-105 would be a great starter lens for sure and 35.8 would be a great prime for the price. I am not a big fan of super zoom lenses so I would say No.

[HiSpec]

Indoor, events, outdoor activities and rarely any landscape unless I go on a hike or a road trip.

[Go4Long]

don't necessarily take this at face value, since some of his results are slightly skewed...but here's rockwells reviews of

the 18-200
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18200.htm

and the 18-105
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18-105mm.htm

from the sounds of things the 18-105 has some serious weaknesses.

a fast prime is awesome though, but for $250 you're not going to be able to get much in terms of a new lens...maybe a 35mm 1.8. the old 50mm 1.4 D is a good lens for the money, but it's a little higher than your $250 budget.

[HiSpec]

yeah i realize that the 18-200 is a much more of a all-around lens compare to 18-105. But all my friends tell me that a prime lens is a must!!

but even at 18 on the 18-200 it suffers the same barrel distortion as 18-105.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Get the 18-105, it's a great lens for the price and is way sharper than the 18-200. Check out the photozone.de reviews if you want.

I would get the cheaper 18-105 kit and spend the difference on a new 35/1.8 prime, which is quite inexpensive at $268 and is sharper and faster than either of the zooms.

[dr_jared88]

Unless you need the zoom I'd go for option 2. You'll enjoy the prime lens much more then the 18-200mm.

[bcylau]

I would say option 2.


D90 w/ 35mm 1.8 prime. I doubt you will use your zoom a lot after you see the image quality of this lens compared to either of the zooms.

[mboldt]

I vote D90, 18-105, 70-300VR eventually.

[HiSpec]

thanks for all the replies and suggestions

I keep thinking that having extra zoom will benefit more as an walk-around lens. But i guess the lesser quality of the 18-200 doesn't justify the extra cost. So I am set for D90 with the kit lens and a 35/1.8 prime lens :D

[clem24]

I would go with the 18-105. The 18-200 is a nice lens; mine is quite sharp. Bokeh is ugly as hell. But it's a nice walk around lens. However, the range between 105-200 is very seldomly used (at least for me). Depending on your shooting level: don't bother with the 70-300. Save your money and use it for a wide angle. Forget the prime. You'll find you'll leave your tele and prime in the bag but always reaching for a wide.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by clem24
Save your money and use it for a wide angle. Forget the prime. You'll find you'll leave your tele and prime in the bag but always reaching for a wide.

That depends on shooting style, my 30/1.4 or 50/1.4 are on the camera 90% of the time, while I only use the 17-35 when I absolutely need wider.

Besides, you sold your 12-24 to a friend of mine, so I know you ain't rocking that wide shit no more. :devil:

[Gibson]

I agree with Trevor on the primes, I have the 50 F/1.4 and the 18-200 and I use the 50 more than the zoom.

[clem24]

Originally posted by BerserkerCatSplat
Besides, you sold your 12-24 to a friend of mine, so I know you ain't rocking that wide shit no more. :devil:

That's because it got replaced.. er bumped, by a different lens... :D

Anyways, fair enough on the primes vs. zoom discussion. I guess I just love my wides.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by clem24


That's because it got replaced.. er bumped, by a different lens... :D



Haha, sweet. What'd you pick up that bumped it?

[clem24]

Originally posted by BerserkerCatSplat


Haha, sweet. What'd you pick up that bumped it?

11-16 f/2.8 sucka

Although I honestly haven't touched my DSLR ever since I picked up the LX3!

[HiSpec]

So yesterday I bought the D90 18-105 kit... did not get the prime lens yet. I am going on a trip to edmonton this thursday, I want to see what range I am usually in before deciding to buy the prime lens or not.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by clem24


11-16 f/2.8 sucka



Sweet, let me know how you like it if you ever put away the LX3, I've been eyeing that 11-16 myself.





Originally posted by HiSpec
So yesterday I bought the D90 18-105 kit... did not get the prime lens yet. I am going on a trip to edmonton this thursday, I want to see what range I am usually in before deciding to buy the prime lens or not.

Congrats! Now go have some fun with it.

[clem24]

Originally posted by BerserkerCatSplat
Sweet, let me know how you like it if you ever put away the LX3, I've been eyeing that 11-16 myself.

Works great! I've taken one picture with it. Literally. :rofl:

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Damnit, Clem!


...on the upside, that indicates that I could steal the damned thing from you and you'd never notice. :D

[clem24]

Haha honestly it looks, feels and weighs just like my old 12-24, except now the zoom range is hopelessly useless. It's almost like I didn't even get a new lens. They should've just made it prime and made it smaller or something LOL. And cheaper too...