Ultimate Lens Toolbox for Nikon DSLR?

Friends,

What would the ultimate lens toolkit be for an aspiring photographer to be
able to shoot a full gamut of styles and needs as a sideline business with
Nikon D Series?.

I would hope that it could be done with 3-4 lenses? Would throwing in a
good teleconverter be a good solution for using fewer lenses? I know there
are deferent opinions, but I was hoping there would be consistent averages,
at least on the basics.

My interests are:

Portrait
Sports
Nature/Outdoor
Architecture (indoor and out).
Commercial (from pocket knives to aerial photos).


Thanks for your help,

Dave

 

It really depends on how much you want to spend and can justify spending?

My walk-around pack contains the following lenses:

17-35mm f/2.8D AF
28-70mm f/2.8D AF
(Both of these can be replaced by the 17-55mm f/2.8G DX if you never want
full frame or film)

70-200mm f/2.8 VR and TC 20E II Teleconverter.
50mm f/1.4D
85mm f/1.4D AF
105mm f/2.8D AF Micro Nikkor (I have the new VR model but like the older 105
better)

This combo covers everything I need to do.
Or, depending on the needs of you final product you can probably get by with
an 18-200mm VR lens for about $650.







Rita

 

I have the kit lens that comes with the D70. A little small on the
aperture, but a very good lens (18~70)

The 80~200 f2.8. Great for limiting depth of field and a good all around
telephoto.

A 500 mirror. Incredible when something is really out there. Very sharp.
Very light and compact, but fixed f8.

Just got a 60mm f2.8 Macro. Should also double as a portrait lens. Both
the 60 and 105 are excellent Macro lenses. The 105 will give you a bit more
space from your subject, but it's bigger, heavier and more expensive than
the 60. Still, a great lens.

All the above lenses are autofocus and match the D70 no problem.

I also still have an old 28mm

55 Macro AI

80-200 AI

85mm 1.8 AI

I might sell all the non AF lenses except the 85 1.8. It's still a great
portrait lens, and a nice piece of glass.

My biggest problem was using my old lenses and having to take a bunch of
test shots to get the exposure right. The frustration finally got to me.

 

You could actually use a D50 and the 18-200mm VR. Most of the guys who
buy the D2xs and so on are amateurs. The real pros go cheap and
disposable.

But, hey. My bag has a 12-24mm "landscape" lens, the 18-200mm VR for
travel photography and light macro work, the 17-55mm f/2.8 DX, and the
70-200mm VR. If you want to go long, substitute the 80-400mm VR, which
I also have; it is unwieldy, but it gets a surprising amount of work.

Of course, I am an amateur -- I shoot photos for the fun of it. If
photography became a job, I probably would hate it.

 

This does not match what I've seen at NFL football matches, the
Olympics, and other venues that I believe bring out the "real pros" in
quantity.

 

Yeah, where did he come up with that one?

Every year I attend the grand prix races and the only "pros" I see using
the consumer models are in the stands. The real pros have press passes
to get them closer to the action and none of them were using consumer
cameras and lenses. I saw a lot of D2x and 1Ds cameras, and enough money
in glass to pay all of my bills for the next two years.

By the way, anyone with a camera can get a "photo pass" for about $250
which gives you access to many of the restricted areas after you attend
a safety class. But even with that you don't get commercial rights - the
photos are for your personal use only. I think one of these guys was
using a D200 with the 70-200 VR lense, but that's about as low end as it
gets.

 

You could actually use a D50 and the 18-200mm VR. Most of the guys who

I used to work for AP. The real pros get the best, most rugged equipment
they can get their hand on and use it to death. They may argue over Canon
and Nikon, but you won't find any "cheap, disposable" bodies or lenses in
their bags.

This is not to say you can't take a great photo with a D50 and a Tamron
lens. It's just that pros have come to rely on the fact that pro equipment
and lenses made by the same manufacturer as your camera will outperform and
outlast lesser models. Where an armature will take great pains to coddle
their equipment, most pros equipment tends to get knocked around quite a
bit. This is part of the reason professional equipment tends to cost more.
It's just more rugged.

 

This is what another press organization has to say:

A comment from an editor at The Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/business/media/asktheeditors.html

Equipment for Photographers

Q. I am an amateur photographer, and I am interested in some of the
technical aspects. I imagine that all of your photographers now use digital
cameras. If so, do they use 35mm format digital cameras, or a larger
format? What format do you receive these photos in -- RAW or JPEG?
-- Patrick Reardon, Fort Worth, Texas

A. Yes, all of our photographers are equipped digitally. We currently use
35mm-format Canon Mark II's and 5D's with a variety of lenses from 10mm to
600mm. We have Hasselblad and large format equipment that shoots film. Our
photographers are also equipped with lighting equipment -- 2 strobe heads,
battery packs and filters. We receive the photos in JPEG format. Good luck
shooting!

 

12-24 f/4 (that will cover your indoor architecture and various outdoor
shots).
70-200 f/2.8 VR (sweet lens, dare I say heavenly)
105 f/2.8D macro (older model but it's excellent). Good for both
macros and portraits.

I shoot with a D70s and got the "kit" 18-70 f/3.5-4.5 with it. It's a
nice lens and takes great shots. But I wish that Nikon would make an
18-70 f/2.8. Just my sidenote.

Kevin

 

Why stop there?

How about an 18-200 f/2.8 AFS VR that's sharp wide open?

 

And if it also had miminal distortion, that would kick butt!

Kevin

 

Well that goes without saying.

The newest rumour is the next Nikon D90(?) will come with this new kit
lense for only $99 extra.

 

I haven't heard anything about a new lens. But I just saw this:

http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/news.php?newsId=4020

Kevin