what should i look for when purchasing a 2nd hand flash. the seller it's been used 3 times. who knows. grabbing another 430exII.

Hey guys i have a nikon d60 i have the 18-55 lens i wanted to get some input on thats another
Type of lens i could get thanks will mainly be using for street photos
Posted via RS Mobile

Ditch the 18-55 and get the 17-55mm f2.8 if you can. That might be a good start...and then get some wide prime lenses.

There's a billion of lens out there. You're gonna have to provide us a least a bare budget you want to work at....

couple shiny new lenses.....:fuckyea:


Sigma 150mm Macro, and the Canon EF 70-300 L IS

http://www.epicdevelopements.com/wp-.../lensimage.jpg

^beautiful. I hear nothing but great things about the Sigma 150. And the 70-300L, well that's already becoming a great addition to the L family.

couple of macros from today( from Reifel) :

http://www.epicdevelopements.com/wp-.../04/snake1.jpg


http://www.epicdevelopements.com/wp-...04/flower1.jpg

anybody have any thoughts on the tamron 18-270 mm with the new pzd?

i need a all around lens for traveling

i heard that it's a bit soft at full zoom, but can be corrected a bit by stopping at f/8

^ How often do you need 270mm?

A good all around lens is a 18-55mm. Haha.

^i'll be needing it quite often, i already got some advice from a few photographer friends, i'll be getting it soon

especially for this year and next
i'll be going to Vegas, Africa, India, Dubai, Hong Kong, Beijing, Taiwan, Shanghai, and various random places, when ever i go to India, Dubai, Africa i go on desert safari's and wild life safari's, not to mention zoo's, aquariums, lots of scenic opportunities

im pretty sure the farthest i would usually zoom is to 200mm, but there will definitely be times where a 270mm zoom would come in handy



18 - 55mm is definitely not my idea of a good all around lens, and the 55-250 i herd is not worth it, way to soft especially on the edges

eventually, when i get more of a steady income, i'll be upgrading to better quality lenses

I'm also planning on getting that lens.

hmm sigma 10-20mm or should I continue on my quest to saving up for a 70-200mm 2.8?

I currently have:
50mm 1.4
85mm 1.8
17-50mm 2.8

I would really love a telephoto and I have my eyes on the 70-200mm VRI. Would there be a different alternative or should I just keep saving? I wouldn't mind getting a wide angle lens either like the 10-20mm

that's bad advice since he has a D60... 17-55mm much too front heavy.

what if you added a battery grip?

i'm not sure if that's bad advice ... b/c of ergonomics

Not really...it's not that heavy - the 14-24 is front heavy. The D60 isn't super light like a D40, and the 17-55 is the top DX zoom for Nikon.

^D60 is almost the same weight at the D40, maybe 20g more.

17-55mm seems overkill for the D40/D40x/D60/D3000/D3100.. probably better matched to D90/D7000/D300s IMO.

With a D60, must as well stick with a 18-55mm kit lens. There's not too much wrong with it.

Anohter problem is that the 17-55mm is $1400. That seems way overkill for an older entry level body, with pretty much the same zoom range, but MUCH heavier lens and larger.

I would think an investment in the $200 35mm f1.8 would do more for photography, esp if he wants do street photos.

Or, if he really insists on a fast zoom, Sigma 16-50 f2.8 is a good choice and save $600 in the process. It's lighter too.

However, my vote is the 16-85mm. I used it all the time for the D40, and I really liked it, esp the VR function, since the D40 had bad higher ISO performance.

I think it's better to have a good lens on a cheaper body than vice versa. If budget allows, I'd say go for it. I don't consider it heavy personally.

I would never even consider a Sigma - what if it fails for some reason? You're going to wait 3-4 months to get it back from servicing.

Nikon 16-85....forgot about that one...I keep forgetting about the various DX lenses Nikon has since we don't stock them.

I need a new wide angle lens pretty bad. I've been using the Nikon 18-55mm kit lens for sometime now.

I was thinking of the new Tamron 18-270mm PZD version and the Sigma 18-50mm 2.8 lens.

I've heard good reviews for both lenses... still not to sure which one to go for.

How about the aforementioned Nikon 16-85?

^havent heard much about it.
Ill look into it.
Posted via RS Mobile

what exactly do you mean by 'good'? good value? good performance? the sigma 17-50 >> 18-50 from what i've read.

nikon 10-24mm

^ That's not a particularly good Wide Angle lens imo.

1. It's expensive
2. It's soft just about everywhere
3. The build quality is inferior to the older Nikon 12-24mm.


If you need wide angle, in my opinion, the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 is king.

the truth, but at more than 50% more cost, it's pretty hefty cost difference. I personally have the 18-50 and am very happy with it, but would definitely jump to the 17-50 for the OS and HSM.

Looking at the 80-200 F2.8D ED Lens. I've seen a couple ranging from $700-$900 on CL. Anyone have experience or suggestions on this len? Any common issues I should include in my considerations?