The promotion will run from 27th April 2017 – 4th August 2017 and all claims must be received by the 4th September 2017 (inclusive) in order to qualify.
Top comments
lukeo44 to puddles9999
2 May 1711#12
notos to RJ1
2 May 174#7
35mm f1.8G as mentioned by others is a great lens for 'regular' photography and will work well with your D3200. I have one and it's super. If you're looking for a narrower field of view the 50mm as mentioned is also great, but it's a bit restrictive for all round use. People tend to dismiss them, but the 18-55mm kit lenses are pretty good too, although not quite as sharp and you'll not get that heavy background blur you can with the other two. You needn't spend more than £150 on either of those prime lens.
imkpmg
2 May 173#23
Another hobbyist photographer here. Might help someone to make decisions. After getting the D5300, in the buying phase, at some point I had the following lenses:
I realised I almost never used my 18-55 any more, so I got rid of it. 55-200 is almost never used, stays in the bag most of the times, except maybe when I go to the zoo or one of the games. I find the the 18-105 most versatile and when I know I need indoor portraits, I put on the 35mm. It is very sharp and very shallow DOF, it is amazing to see how much light it can capture!
If I were to do it from scratch, my lenses would be:
- 35mm / 1.8 - Potraits
- 18-xxx - general use
- 17-55 / 2.8 - if I had extra money lying around :smiley:
CRTB to puddles9999
2 May 173#18
Why even bother with that? Save even more money buy just carrying a pencil and drawing what you see.
All comments (44)
RJ1
1 May 171#1
Hi. Which lens are best for close up images of a baby / toddler, to go with my Nikon D3200. Thanks
radekmisztal to RJ1
1 May 171#3
35 or 50 mm :wink: i am not an expert but pictures looks nice and sharp :wink:
notos to RJ1
2 May 174#7
35mm f1.8G as mentioned by others is a great lens for 'regular' photography and will work well with your D3200. I have one and it's super. If you're looking for a narrower field of view the 50mm as mentioned is also great, but it's a bit restrictive for all round use. People tend to dismiss them, but the 18-55mm kit lenses are pretty good too, although not quite as sharp and you'll not get that heavy background blur you can with the other two. You needn't spend more than £150 on either of those prime lens.
Inquisitor to RJ1
2 May 171#11
To add to previous poster who gave excellent description.
I had both 35mm and 50mm from Nikon and now Sony (a6000).
I've always found the 35mm to be more versatile as it can be easily used in indoor photography, but- the 'magic' you get from a 50mm is imo much better.
As a preference, I will always stick on my 50mm first, if I really can't work with the 50mm as I'm hanging off a ledge or walking out the door to take simple shots I will switch to 35mm.
I'm only an enthusiast but have been doing it for nearly 10 years.
I would suggest to get both, but it was only after a long time till I took the jump to get both.
Or, you won't go far wrong to get either :laughing:
fuiseog to RJ1
2 May 17#14
For a first lens I'd agree with the 35mm F1.8. This has the same effect as a 50mm on a DX camera like yours. Best price for a Nikon UK copy is about £150 delivered.
It would be cheaper through grey market suppliers, or ebay, but you won't get the Nikon UK guarantee.
I use a Nikon D5500, a similar weight camera. I also have the Nikon 50mm 1.4G (£350), a better portrait lens but you need more space to use it indoors (need to stand further from subject ) and it's longer and heavier to carry about.
bennybentley to RJ1
2 May 17#20
ive got the 50 mm and its great for close up shots took some great pics with it of my child ...
be2st to RJ1
2 May 17#24
I voted for 35mm for indoor photography.
eatmorefish to RJ1
2 May 17#26
You need 50mm f1.8. Loads of cheap ones either new or secondhand.
Perfect for baby/toddler portraits.
Ignore f1.4: way over the top for your needs, and shallow DOF when wide open can cause problems for the inexperienced.
35mm even with crop factor won't give as good portraits as 50mm IMHO.
OliWarner to RJ1
2 May 17#27
I've had a lot of success with a 24-35mm f/2 on a full frame body. Allows you to get very close but still get an idea of scale.
You're on an DX body which limits your choice. Nikon do a 35mm f/1.8 DX for around £130. You'll struggle going back to cheap tele-lenses after spending time on a fast prime though.
the__cat to RJ1
2 May 17#30
I've got the 35mm Nikkor AF-S 1.8G, the 50mm Nikkor AF 1.8D and the 50mm Nikkor AF-S 1.8G. I go to the 50mm 1.8D first as my body will autofocus with that lens (it won't on your camera) and it gives much sharper images up-front and a nice bokeh (blurry-background effect) usually.
The 50mm 1.8G gives slightly better images than the 35mm 1.8G but the 35 is what I use indoors where space is an issue.
My order of preference is:
50mm 1.8D if you can live with manual focus and space isn't an issue
50mm 1.8G if you need autofocus and you can move further away from the subject
35mm if you need to physically be closer to your subject to get the shot
They're all cheap-ish lenses so choose whichever works for you and I'm sure you'll be happy with it.
skirocket to RJ1
2 May 17#31
I have a d500 and I have the 85mm 1.8g which I use to take pictures of my 8 month daughter with, it is an amazing lens. the 50mm 1.8g is also a very good lens so id recommend either of those depends what focal length you prefer.
telcoengr to RJ1
4 May 17#41
Get 40mm f2.8 micro for closer prime shots. This is also macro lens so you can get really clos3 to insects too
MazingerZ
1 May 17#2
I'm a beginner, but, the best one in that list, is not cheap... You'll need to get a budget and then compare. You're looking at £250+ for used ones. But I'm sure someone else can assist you better as I'm new to this stuff too..
td0s
1 May 171#4
50mm would be my choice, lovely lens
MazingerZ
1 May 17#5
Yeah all depends on their budget. I have a Nikkor 16-80mm lens brilliants for decent closeups even though it's not a macro
Batmobile543
2 May 17#6
I preferred 35mm over 50mm after hell of a research
puddles9999
2 May 171#8
Unless professional why do people buy these because phone cameras look decent
brilly to puddles9999
2 May 171#10
'decent' ...cool
how are they for taking a picture of that bird in the tree over there? or in the darkened room?
how many shots per second can they take? etc etc
phone cameras are not really relevant as completely different
lukeo44 to puddles9999
2 May 1711#12
jazlabs to puddles9999
2 May 171#15
Phone cameras are indeed 'decent', but they are so limited! You need the latest iPhone Plus to even get 'simulated' control of aperture. I shoot on aperture priority most the time on my DSLR! Zoom is non-existent. I am definitely no professional, I currently have a Canon EOS 750D with (18-135mm) kit lens, and awaiting delivery of a wide angle 10-18mm lens.
CRTB to puddles9999
2 May 173#18
Why even bother with that? Save even more money buy just carrying a pencil and drawing what you see.
Haircut_100 to puddles9999
2 May 172#29
Your question is sort of like asking "Why do people buy a gaming PC when you can play decent games on a tablet", or perhaps "Why do people buy BMW and Mercedes cars when you can get from A to B decently with a Skoda or Dacia". It's all relative in terms of what you define as "decent", and how much enjoyment you get from your hobby and feel is worth investing in it.
For you, as I'm guessing is someone who has never used a DSLR, a mobile phone camera might well be decent enough for your needs, and that's fine. But good luck taking a clear picture of fast moving children or sports, or a portrait indoors in low light, or capturing a beach scene without blowing out the highlights. DSLR cameras excel at being very fast to take pictures, are speedy to focus, and handle well, with external controls to adjust your exposure compensation, shooting and focus modes. And if that means nothing to you? Again that's fine, they aren't for everyone. But for those of us that enjoy the hobby of photography, rather than just wanting to take a snapshot that may or may not be in focus, mobile phone cameras can offer a very unsatisfying experience.
brilly
2 May 17#9
better than buying a lens would be finding out the basics about focal lengths, performances and lenses available
RJ1
2 May 17#13
Thanks everyone for your advice. Better get saving
kashavsehra to RJ1
2 May 171#25
simple way to decide, set your kit lens to 35mm and see if you are happy with that depth, then same again at 50mm. You will soon know which you prefer! I found 50mm was a bit too tight for general portraits...
Cyrus
2 May 17#16
im in the same situation. Which lens did you get and how much? I want something with a small f stop value to get nice depth in field shots
r2mahara
2 May 17#17
What's the best price on a D3400 Vr kit at the moment, including the cashback?
tezray
2 May 17#19
I got my missus a d5500 really want to get the 50mm but have seen second hand they can go for more than new. Can't find a bargain one anywhere. she has the kit lens vr ii. A Tamron 70-300 I think but wants to take portraits mostly. Can anyone recommend where to get one I used flubit on amazon and the price wasn't too bad
Beano007 to tezray
5 May 17#42
I got my 35mm at e-infinity online (also my camera) - Its presumably grey import as it was a lot cheaper - delivery was prompt though and from within the EU and I'm pretty sure there wasn't any problems when I registered for my camera warranty.
MazingerZ
2 May 17#21
I got my 16-80mm lens on 'clearance' for £579 used
jazlabs
2 May 171#22
I'm afraid I don't really feel qualified to advise, but can tell you what I bought and why; I purchased the 750D kit with the Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM lens. I went for that over the 18-55mm kit as I wanted an everyday lens with more zoom. My wife is using a 400D with the EF-S 18-200mm IS USM and it has proved a great everyday lens, so this was the closes equivalent available as a kit. I've just ordered the Canon EF-S 10-18mm f4.5-5.6 IS STM lens as I wanted a wide angle lens for better shots of buildings, landscapes and in small rooms. This particular lens seems to exhibit good value for money and is highly reviewed.
imkpmg
2 May 173#23
Another hobbyist photographer here. Might help someone to make decisions. After getting the D5300, in the buying phase, at some point I had the following lenses:
I realised I almost never used my 18-55 any more, so I got rid of it. 55-200 is almost never used, stays in the bag most of the times, except maybe when I go to the zoo or one of the games. I find the the 18-105 most versatile and when I know I need indoor portraits, I put on the 35mm. It is very sharp and very shallow DOF, it is amazing to see how much light it can capture!
If I were to do it from scratch, my lenses would be:
- 35mm / 1.8 - Potraits
- 18-xxx - general use
- 17-55 / 2.8 - if I had extra money lying around :smiley:
eatmorefish
2 May 17#28
lmfao. You stick with your Fx. Keep up with the success. :wink:
Pimpson
2 May 17#32
Can anyone suggest a good second hand SLR for a beginner please?
Haircut_100 to Pimpson
2 May 17#33
To be honest, any entry level camera from Nikon or Canon would do for you (and I'm sure that others may also suggest Pentax or Sony, who have some nice stabilised bodies). Really it's not so much about which camera should you go for (because all the DSLR brands have great cameras for beginners), but more about which manufacturers system you want to be tied in to. Once you've decided whether you want to be a Canon guy or a Nikon guy, then you can decide whether you want to buy a new model entry level DSLR aimed at beginners, or perhaps a slightly older used semi-pro model that will offer you excellent value for money. It also depends on what you intend to photograph, and which brand have the lenses you'll need at a price you'll like, if you want to build on from the kit lens. Really this is probably a question that you'll probably find lots of threads and in depth advice on this very question on a photography forum (such as DP Review) rather than here.
TL/DR answer = any of the main DSLR brands will have a capable camera that you can't go wrong with, it just depends on what your budget is and what brand's system appeals to you.
Inquisitor
2 May 17#34
I don't agree that it's 'the same effect as dx camera on 50mm..'
In dx 50mm it's only cropped. The focal length doesn't change.
In a 35mm it is different, it gives distortion to the image. It has a different focal length.
Fov for 35mm full frame maybe the same as 50mm cropped but focal length is not the same.
Unless of course you get post editing software to correct the distortion.
Pimpson
2 May 17#35
Thank you for the detailed reply. Appreciated
Jiffy
2 May 17#36
I've just bought a D5500 after using a D40 for the last 10 years. I'm sticking with the 18-55mm kit lens for landscapes but I'm getting a 35mm f/1.8g as well. They seem to hold their prices 2nd hand so may end up getting a new one with 2 year warranty from John Lewis for £158.
I'm going to use this offer to upgrade from my 55-200mm VR to the new AF-P 70-300mm VR lens as it's getting really good reviews and is much cheaper than the other 300mm zoom lenses. Has anyone found a better price than £288 from Mifsuds? For an extra £11 Clifton Cameras are selling it with a 2 year warranty. It needs to be an authorised seller for Nikon's £65 cashback so no eGlobal, etc suggestions please!
cbflazaro1
3 May 17#37
I've seen many wannabe photographers that actually take worse photos on their dslrs than they do on their phones
cbflazaro1
3 May 17#38
The nikon 50 1.4 is probably the worse 50mm made in the last 15 years
jazlabs
3 May 17#39
It's a lot easier to take a bad photo with a DSLR than a phone camera, especially when off auto. Not all hobbyists are wannabe photographers though. I have no intention of ever making photography my profession, but after days of having a DSLR and a few hours of reading I had already captured photos that would simply have been impossible with my phone.
tezray
3 May 17#40
I bought the d5500 for my wife but am looking for the 50mm 1.8g for her to take portrait pictures and same they hold the money so well so annoying flubit on amazon came back with a good price
Selondon
16 May 17#43
I have a d3200 that I would love to upgrade to a d5500/7200 (if I had the £).
Lens wise I had the 18-55 but it broke (dropped) so I got a great 18-105 from eBay.
Would like the 50mm or the 35mm (reviews above are good!) but neither are on the cashback list are they?
Opening post
The promotion will run from 27th April 2017 – 4th August 2017 and all claims must be received by the 4th September 2017 (inclusive) in order to qualify.
Top comments
- 18-55 kit lens
- 35mm / 1.8 Nikon
- 55-200 Nikon VR2
- 18-105 Nikon 3.5-22 (I think)
I realised I almost never used my 18-55 any more, so I got rid of it. 55-200 is almost never used, stays in the bag most of the times, except maybe when I go to the zoo or one of the games. I find the the 18-105 most versatile and when I know I need indoor portraits, I put on the 35mm. It is very sharp and very shallow DOF, it is amazing to see how much light it can capture!
If I were to do it from scratch, my lenses would be:
- 35mm / 1.8 - Potraits
- 18-xxx - general use
- 17-55 / 2.8 - if I had extra money lying around :smiley:
All comments (44)
I had both 35mm and 50mm from Nikon and now Sony (a6000).
I've always found the 35mm to be more versatile as it can be easily used in indoor photography, but- the 'magic' you get from a 50mm is imo much better.
As a preference, I will always stick on my 50mm first, if I really can't work with the 50mm as I'm hanging off a ledge or walking out the door to take simple shots I will switch to 35mm.
I'm only an enthusiast but have been doing it for nearly 10 years.
I would suggest to get both, but it was only after a long time till I took the jump to get both.
Or, you won't go far wrong to get either :laughing:
http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/Nikon/Nikon-DX-Lenses/Nikon-AF-S-35mm-f1.8-G-DX-Lens
It would be cheaper through grey market suppliers, or ebay, but you won't get the Nikon UK guarantee.
I use a Nikon D5500, a similar weight camera. I also have the Nikon 50mm 1.4G (£350), a better portrait lens but you need more space to use it indoors (need to stand further from subject ) and it's longer and heavier to carry about.
Perfect for baby/toddler portraits.
Ignore f1.4: way over the top for your needs, and shallow DOF when wide open can cause problems for the inexperienced.
35mm even with crop factor won't give as good portraits as 50mm IMHO.
You're on an DX body which limits your choice. Nikon do a 35mm f/1.8 DX for around £130. You'll struggle going back to cheap tele-lenses after spending time on a fast prime though.
The 50mm 1.8G gives slightly better images than the 35mm 1.8G but the 35 is what I use indoors where space is an issue.
My order of preference is:
50mm 1.8D if you can live with manual focus and space isn't an issue
50mm 1.8G if you need autofocus and you can move further away from the subject
35mm if you need to physically be closer to your subject to get the shot
They're all cheap-ish lenses so choose whichever works for you and I'm sure you'll be happy with it.
how are they for taking a picture of that bird in the tree over there? or in the darkened room?
how many shots per second can they take? etc etc
phone cameras are not really relevant as completely different
For you, as I'm guessing is someone who has never used a DSLR, a mobile phone camera might well be decent enough for your needs, and that's fine. But good luck taking a clear picture of fast moving children or sports, or a portrait indoors in low light, or capturing a beach scene without blowing out the highlights. DSLR cameras excel at being very fast to take pictures, are speedy to focus, and handle well, with external controls to adjust your exposure compensation, shooting and focus modes. And if that means nothing to you? Again that's fine, they aren't for everyone. But for those of us that enjoy the hobby of photography, rather than just wanting to take a snapshot that may or may not be in focus, mobile phone cameras can offer a very unsatisfying experience.
- 18-55 kit lens
- 35mm / 1.8 Nikon
- 55-200 Nikon VR2
- 18-105 Nikon 3.5-22 (I think)
I realised I almost never used my 18-55 any more, so I got rid of it. 55-200 is almost never used, stays in the bag most of the times, except maybe when I go to the zoo or one of the games. I find the the 18-105 most versatile and when I know I need indoor portraits, I put on the 35mm. It is very sharp and very shallow DOF, it is amazing to see how much light it can capture!
If I were to do it from scratch, my lenses would be:
- 35mm / 1.8 - Potraits
- 18-xxx - general use
- 17-55 / 2.8 - if I had extra money lying around :smiley:
TL/DR answer = any of the main DSLR brands will have a capable camera that you can't go wrong with, it just depends on what your budget is and what brand's system appeals to you.
In dx 50mm it's only cropped. The focal length doesn't change.
In a 35mm it is different, it gives distortion to the image. It has a different focal length.
Fov for 35mm full frame maybe the same as 50mm cropped but focal length is not the same.
Unless of course you get post editing software to correct the distortion.
I'm going to use this offer to upgrade from my 55-200mm VR to the new AF-P 70-300mm VR lens as it's getting really good reviews and is much cheaper than the other 300mm zoom lenses. Has anyone found a better price than £288 from Mifsuds? For an extra £11 Clifton Cameras are selling it with a 2 year warranty. It needs to be an authorised seller for Nikon's £65 cashback so no eGlobal, etc suggestions please!
Lens wise I had the 18-55 but it broke (dropped) so I got a great 18-105 from eBay.
Would like the 50mm or the 35mm (reviews above are good!) but neither are on the cashback list are they?