D3100

[tasherlock]

After 12 months waiting to afford a D3100 the moment will finally arrive in 2/3 weeks. Comes with 18-55 as usual. Wondered which would be the best way to go for a second lens. Looking forward to using the camera.

[ricktas]

what do you shoot? landscapes, portraits, sports? The second lens should be based on what genre you like to shoot.

[Mary Anne]

Then there is Macro Lens for Insects and Flowers. And a Telephoto lens for Birds, Wildlife and more Flowers.

[ameerat42]

An ultra wide angle lens?

[arthurking83]

Before recommending other lenses, as already stated .. it's best to indicate to the members what your goals are.
What is your preferred photography subject matter.

35mm f/1.8 can be a fun lens to have access too for a lot of general usage.

[Dazz1]

I am pondering the same thing. Which second lens, after the 18-55mm kit lens that came with the camera (600D in my case). A wide aperture prime lens is often recommended though. I definitely want a macro, and I also envy those with a good long telephoto - so it's just a matter of which one first.

[tasherlock]

Thanks for the interest. I am interested in landscape and nature. Am considering the 55-200 as a start. I feel the 2 lenses will cover those interests for a while yet. So much to learn and enjoy in that package.

[Dazz1]

Thanks for the interest. I am interested in landscape and nature. Am considering the 55-200 as a start. I feel the 2 lenses will cover those interests for a while yet. So much to learn and enjoy in that package.

When I looked at zoom/tele I was wondering if something that went to 300mm or more would be better. I was looking at 70-300mm actually. I wonder what the experts think is needed.

[deef]

The Nikon 70-300 VR is a pretty good lens. I like mine. A couple of pix from it are in this thread.

http://www.ausphotography.net.au/for...oint-afternoon

The thing to watch is that there is a couple of versions though. The non VR version is very cheap (about the same price as a 55-200 VR) but it is not a great lens. You definitely get what you pay for. The 55-200 is better for the same money. The VR version of the 70-300, which I have, while more expensive, has better image quality and therefore better value in the longer term.

[tasherlock]

Thanks for your reply John. Finances limit me to the 55-200 with VR and I look forward to using it. Now have the camera and learning to use it. Has anyone tried the free course in DSLR with Karl Taylor.

[William]

Thanks for your reply John. Finances limit me to the 55-200 with VR and I look forward to using it. Now have the camera and learning to use it. Has anyone tried the free course in DSLR with Karl Taylor.

IMO I think your better off looking at the AP Beginner courses and Tutes here on AP , I had a look at his Videos and a lot of the stuff you will get with practice , All you need to learn is the Photographic Triangle , Which is Aperture , ISO and shutter speed, Once you have that the sky's the limit , Save your money and go out and shoot , Post the pics on here for CC and you WILL learn , A lot more cheaply , BTW most of the shots that he showed were shot in a studio environment with a lot of real expensive gear which many of us will never aspire to having , Would be good though Your on the Sunshine Coast , Look at the members meets and go out in a group , You will learn heaps - Bill

[Granville]

Remember that on a D3100 you have a cropped sensor so do the adjustment before you buy if you're looking at FX lenses.

[arthurking83]

..... you have a cropped sensor so do the adjustment before you buy if you're looking at FX lenses.

adjustment? .... which adjustment?

[Granville]

The 35mm becomes 50mm. The 50 becomes about an 85mm. etc

[arthurking83]

You should be careful with these conversions.

An Xmm lens is always an Xmm lens irrespective of the format it's used with.

What you are describing is simple crop factor reduction in the FOV of the lens .. where the 50mm lens on full frame, looks like a 35mm lens on APS-C.

There is no adjustment to be done, and the fact that the lens is made for Fx has no impact on the result either.

All (D)SLR lenses are marked with their actual focal lengths(or focal length ranges) .. and no adjustments should be made when fitting to either an APS-C camera or full frame camera.
Marked focal lengths on lenses are important for many reasons, and as one example of this, depth of field can be one of those considerations to allow for when the focal length of the lens is known.

So for a lens with Xmm focal length, it will provide a specific depth of field for a given focused distance and aperture value .. no matter what format you are using.
The fact that an Xmm lens on an APS-C camera will provide a narrower field of view that it will on a full frame camera is actually irrelevant(to the lenses specifications and properties).

Hopefully your not leading yourself astray with your last comments, in that Fx lenses have some magical power to transform your Dx camera in some way.

So (that is) a 10-300mm lens made for Fx will provide exactly the same technical specifications(that lenses usually provide) on both an Fx camera and a Dx camera .... and conversely a Dx lens of 10-300mm will provide exactly the same technical specs on a Dx camera as it will on an Fx camera ... the only caveat being that with the Dx lens on an Fx format is that you will see the darkened corners of the Dx lens limitations.

[Kym]

The 35mm becomes 50mm. The 50 becomes about an 85mm. etc

No it does NOT!!!!!!! (one of my pet peevs, a lens ALWAYS has the same focal length, marketing tries to say lies about this )

I even drew a picture to explain it...
http://www.ausphotography.net.au/for...vs_Crop_Factor

[deef]

Thanks for your reply John. Finances limit me to the 55-200 with VR and I look forward to using it. Now have the camera and learning to use it. Has anyone tried the free course in DSLR with Karl Taylor.

Fully understand the cash flow situation. I have the 55-200 non-VR version and its a good lens. Great for the $$$$. Its in the care of my daughter these days (along with the D50) and she gets very nice pix out of it.

Have fun with your new toys.

[Granville]

No it does NOT!!!!!!! (one of my pet peevs, a lens ALWAYS has the same focal length, marketing tries to say lies about this )

I even drew a picture to explain it...
http://www.ausphotography.net.au/for...vs_Crop_Factor

This seems to contradict many other discussions on this topic.

I have a D3100 with a 50mm prime. I take a portrait and frame from the top of the head to the armpits.
If someone is standing next to me with a full frame camera and the same 50mm lens, they will stand closer to the subject to get the same framing. No?

[Dazz1]

This seems to contradict many other discussions on this topic.

I have a D3100 with a 50mm prime. I take a portrait and frame from the top of the head to the armpits.
If someone is standing next to me with a full frame camera and the same 50mm lens, they will stand closer to the subject to get the same framing. No?

Surely the seeming contradiction is why they use they term "effectively" a lot. The 50mm lens behaves effectively like an 85mm on the crop sensor camera.

[tasherlock]

Thanks for all the info which I will take notice of. However, I only intend to use a DX lens which suits the D3100. Thinking seriously about the 55-300 when I am comfortable with what I have.