Lens choice, a little help (for digital slr)

[Fat Boy]

hello,
I will be getting a D 70 shortly. I can not decied on which lens to get w/ it other than the "kit" lens (18-70mm). The 17-55 f 2.0 if unavalable and there is no Nikon matching lens to extend the range after 55mm ( actually in digital size 85mm film equal). I would like to get the 70-200 Nikkor VR but for digital that would be only a 105-300mm (film equal) and I had the Nikkor 100-300 5.6 and even though it was a little slow, the range was weird to me. That only doubles magnification by 1.5 (100 to 200 is double and 200 to 300 is 1/2). $1500 for this range just does not seam like its worth it.

Any recomendations? I would like a wide angle zoom 17-35mm (or 17-50mm) and a 70-200mm for my digital camera. These figures are film related to use common sizes that we are used to. I would think it would be easier for camera companies to make a 17-55mm digital lens and a corresponding matching lens of about 60mm to 150mm in digital format.

Hope the #s did not confuse you.

Fat Boy

[Photo-John]

Hey, Fat Boy. This is a good question because it is sort of a problem for people who've been using film cameras for a long time. There are starting to be digital-specific lenses, but personally, I haven't gone down that road yet. I kept what I had and added some wider primes to make my digital cameras work better. My most used lenses are a 70-200 f/2.8, a 20mm f/2.8, a 15mm fisheye, and a 50mm f/1.4. I'd like a wide zoom, but I haven't found that I need one bad enough to actually spend the money. And I don't know about the Nikon, but I don't think the Canon kit lens is good enough to take seriously, if you don't have to. I'd rather just have one wide prime than a mediocre wide zoom.

I've used the Canon 17-40mm f/4 and it's really nice. I know a bunch of people that use that as their all-purpose lens with a 10D or Digital Rebel. My all-purpose kit is my trusty old 28-135mm IS and the fisheye lens. That's not quite as light and elegant as the 17-40mm, but it's got more reach and I didn't have to spend any money because I already had them.

If it were me, I'd think about one of the Nikon 24-120mm or 24-85mm lenses and the fisheye. If you want a portrait lens, throw in the 50mm f/1.8. The fast 50mm primes make awesome portrait lenses with digital SLRs.

[Franglais]

hello,
I will be getting a D 70 shortly. I can not decied on which lens to get w/ it other than the "kit" lens (18-70mm). The 17-55 f 2.0 if unavalable and there is no Nikon matching lens to extend the range after 55mm ( actually in digital size 85mm film equal). I would like to get the 70-200 Nikkor VR but for digital that would be only a 105-300mm (film equal) and I had the Nikkor 100-300 5.6 and even though it was a little slow, the range was weird to me. That only doubles magnification by 1.5 (100 to 200 is double and 200 to 300 is 1/2). $1500 for this range just does not seam like its worth it.

Any recomendations? I would like a wide angle zoom 17-35mm (or 17-50mm) and a 70-200mm for my digital camera. These figures are film related to use common sizes that we are used to. I would think it would be easier for camera companies to make a 17-55mm digital lens and a corresponding matching lens of about 60mm to 150mm in digital format.

Hope the #s did not confuse you.

Fat Boy

I'm waiting for the announcement of the EOS-20 equivalent from Nikon to decide whether to go for that or a D70. I think the 17-55 f2.8 (not f2.0) is overkill for a D70, especially as the kit lens is so good. For the wideangle end you already have the 12-24 DX (= 18-36 for film) out there. At the tele end I have the feeling that Nikon will anounce a 55-200 shortly (there's always the Sigma lens).

Charles