Restless — An Alex Hall Portrait (Full Film) | Faction Skis

Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Help me buy a new lens!

profile picture
[evan]
Posts: 5628 - Karma: 117
I guess I'll start off by telling you that I have a Nikon D3100 (inb4 lol nikonfag). I only have the kit lens and a shitty Canon FD 50mm 1.8 from like 1984.

I also have a tripod so I guess now it's time to step it up and get some better glass.

The thing is....I don't know where to start. I'm going to be using this lens for like 70% filming and obviously 30% snappin' pics. I want it to perform decently in low light and be a good walk around lense and for filming skiing and skating. I don't really know what I'm looking at for a budget so just give me some names and I'll poke around and see what I can do for cash.

I realize I didn't give much info so feel free to ask any questions if you need more details about what I want.

Thanks guys!
Oct 2 2011 9:20PM
0 0
profile picture
[J_Gasper]
Posts: 2983 - Karma: 1,594
if your looking for a walk around lens for a great price. look into the tamron 17-50 non VC. if you have a bit more money to spend, you could get the canon 24-70 or 24-105. but you cannot really beat the price of the tamron.
Oct 2 2011 9:38PM
0 0
profile picture
MACAQUE
Posts: 2811 - Karma: 696
And old 85/1.4 would be sick. I'd get old manual glass because you'll get the most bang for your buck, and AF is not too important if you're mostly filming.
Oct 2 2011 9:50PM
0 0
profile picture
[evan]
Posts: 5628 - Karma: 117
Ok now I know my budget. Looking at under $800.

AF and VR are not important to me at all.

That Tamron is looking pretty nice, I'm going to go watch some sample vids, anybody on here have it?
Oct 2 2011 9:53PM
0 0
profile picture
123+ski
Posts: 2832 - Karma: 581
it may be sick, but on a crop it is a terrible first/only lens. He should get it, but after he gets one or more lenses to cover the standard range
Oct 2 2011 9:55PM
0 0
profile picture
blatt
Posts: 5584 - Karma: 3,097
Tamron 17-50 or Canon 24-105 if you buy used


I know Abe uses the tamron, and DTF uses a 24-105
Oct 2 2011 9:59PM
0 0
profile picture
MACAQUE
Posts: 2811 - Karma: 696
True. Maybe look at a few primes. You could do a 24/2.8 for well under 800 (more like 300). Nikon kit lenses aren't bad at all. They're just pretty slow and have shitty construction. Optical quality isn't really anything to complain about.


That being said, I'd shoot some more and see what you think you're missing. If you always shoot your kit lens around 35mm (rando number) buy a 24mm prime. If you wish you had more zoom, buy a tele. Same thing goes for a wide angle.
Oct 2 2011 10:00PM
0 0
profile picture
[evan]
Posts: 5628 - Karma: 117
I'm not 100% on anything, but I have a couple gripes with the kit lens. First, the colors are not good at all for both filming and shooting. They're typically just not exuberant enough and don't capture the picture. It also doesnt capture fine details enough in photos. They just don't show up, which is really annoying because it makes it impossible to just take really magnificent photos when your subject is un-clear. (Yes I know how to focus)

It's also bad for filming, like I said, the colors suck, and it is absolutely useless anytime past 430 during the fall. The whole shot will be complete darkness, and then when i stop up or increase the iso the quality is raped (and yes I know it mostly has to do with the camera). The clarity also plays a big part in the video quality, the shot looks rough and almost like grungy.
Oct 2 2011 10:09PM
0 0
profile picture
the.cheat
Posts: 2859 - Karma: 171
why are we all recommending canon glass?
Oct 2 2011 10:21PM
0 0
profile picture
MACAQUE
Posts: 2811 - Karma: 696
We're not?


If you're actually that dissatisfied with the kit lens I'd get a 20mm and 35mm prime, since you already have a 50. I'm partial to primes over zooms.
Oct 2 2011 10:37PM
0 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,328
Lol? Please don't get a Canon lens hahaha, look into an older 80-200
Oct 2 2011 10:46PM
0 0
profile picture
[evan]
Posts: 5628 - Karma: 117
Well that 50mm isnt any good since the D3100 has like a 1.5 crop I think, the lens ends up being a 75mm and thats useless for filming. I want something wider than an 18.
Oct 2 2011 10:47PM
0 0
profile picture
the.cheat
Posts: 2859 - Karma: 171
like 2 or 3 people have been talking about canon lenses
Oct 2 2011 10:59PM
0 0
profile picture
MACAQUE
Posts: 2811 - Karma: 696
If you want wider than 18 get a tokina 11-16 or a sigma 10-20 or something.
Oct 2 2011 11:05PM
0 0
profile picture
ChuckTesta
Posts: 960 - Karma: 258
it is possible to mount canon glass on nikon but i would only do that if you had an L lens which will run you well over $1000
Oct 2 2011 11:12PM
0 0
profile picture
blatt
Posts: 5584 - Karma: 3,097
oh shit, not used to reccomending nikon glass i guess.....


get the nikon equivalent of whatever we say
Oct 2 2011 11:20PM
0 0
profile picture
the.cheat
Posts: 2859 - Karma: 171
But why in the world would you be buying canon l glass for a nikon d3100??? Am I missing something?
Oct 2 2011 11:41PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,098
You're fucking dumb.



So if you have 800 bucks, i'd say first thing is sell that POS canon 50mm and buy a nikon 50mm, you will be much happier. Either a 50mm ai/ais or even an AF-D would be nice for photos and at a similar prices. Well the selling and buying it should counteract, maybe 50 buck total.

Check out a tamron 17-50 nonvc, great lens only 350 or so. great all around lens, great replacement for your kit. Id say try and sell that kit lens but you'll get like 100 bucks probably.

For wide stuff, you have a few options. If you want little to no distortion, the tokina 11-16 is you lens, but it pushes 600-700 dollars. A cheaper solution would be like a sigma 10-20 or tokina 10-17, these will be more like a fish eye.

Another lens to check out would be an 80-200. they make many versions of this lens but the 80-200 f4 is like 150 bucks, then the 2.8 is like 400 then the newer versions are like 800-1000 bucks but i think they'll have AF for photos. But, since video is your primary, the manual 80-200 would work well.

Someone said an 85mm 1.4 i would say scratch that and either get a rokinon 85mm 1.4 or nikon 85mm f2, that is if you wanted an 85.

A 35mm prime could be nice too, you can get a 35mm f2 ais for like 200 bucks.
Oct 2 2011 11:51PM
0 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,328
I still don't see why you would want to buy a Canon lens...
OP, if you're looking for something really wide, check out the Nikon 12-24 F4. You should be able to find a used one for under $800, and IMO it's one of the best UWA's out there.
Oct 2 2011 11:53PM
0 0
profile picture
C-O-L-E
Posts: 138 - Karma: 22
Hey, I have a 3100 and these lenses

the kit lens
tam 17-50 2.8 non vc
24 2.8
35 1.4
50 1.4
85 2
105 2.5
80-200 4.5

and i get to use my moms 80-400 and 10.5 fish


For what you have i would probably just look into an old 35, the tam 17-50, and a 80-200 you can get all that for 800 and you will be pretty stoked. Thats a pretty good quiver of lenses. For video on the d3100 nothing is really better then the 35 1.4, the tam does really well too but having the aperture ring is really nice.

Cole
Oct 3 2011 12:10AM
0 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,328
i came
Oct 3 2011 12:17AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,098
the 35 f2 has been know to be just as good if not better...
Oct 3 2011 12:49AM
0 0
profile picture
tBatt
Posts: 9632 - Karma: 580
http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-28-75mm-Aspherical-Canon-Digital/dp/B0000A1G05
Oct 3 2011 1:20AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,098
that lens is meh and you linked him to the canon version.... can any of you kids read?
Oct 3 2011 2:55AM
0 0
profile picture
[J_Gasper]
Posts: 2983 - Karma: 1,594
shit my bad. i thought he had a t2i, i guess i just have seen to many t2i threads asking what glass.
Oct 3 2011 6:17AM
0 0
profile picture
michael_bc
Posts: 1386 - Karma: 721
Nikon 35mm f/1.8 G is a really nice, inexpensive lens to start with for the D3100. Auto-focuses perfectly etc... It really fixes all the problems you mention about the kit lens: great colors and incredibly sharp.

50mm primes are nice as well, on DX mostly for portraits. I would wait with buying a Nikon 20 or 24mm prime, as they might announce a new DX prime in this range very soon. It will be smaller, cheaper, and focus on your D3100, which the current 20 and 24mm lenses don't.

Tokina 11-16mm would be a great choice for filming, and also for photography if you are a fan of wide angle. Incredibly sharp and great colors.

Don't buy Canon lenses for a Nikon body.
Oct 3 2011 9:56AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,098
You actually can't adapt canon EOS lenses to nikon bodies, so yes please don't buy any canon lenses haha
Oct 3 2011 2:12PM
0 0
profile picture
[evan]
Posts: 5628 - Karma: 117
Well I just found this

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/247091-USA/Nikon_2137_Normal_AF_Nikkor_50mm.html

Now it's a toss up between the Tamron and that Nikkor.

I'd like to have both at some point, but I can't decide what would be better to have first. Having the wider focal length on the Tamron would be better for filming skating and skiing at rail jams, but that 50mm is so cheap and looks so nice.
Oct 4 2011 11:21PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61603 - Karma: 123,098
Id say get the tamron first, since its a larger range. everyone thinks they can just buy a camera and a 50 and be set but 50 is quite tight on a crop. i mean, its only 100 bucks just buy it after the tamron.
Oct 4 2011 11:35PM
0 0
profile picture
michael_bc
Posts: 1386 - Karma: 721
Keep in mind that the 50mm you mention won't autofocus on a D3100. You could consider paying slightly more and getting this one:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/766516-USA/Nikon_2199_AF_S_Nikkor_50mm_f_1_8G.html

It depends how much you can live with manual focus, but at f/1.8, it's good to have autofocus because it's imposible to nail the focus through the viewfinder at this aperture.
Oct 5 2011 5:36AM
0 0
profile picture
WillStart
Posts: 3955 - Karma: 3,192
this. 50mm is so fun but i would hate my setup without a lens in the sub-20mm range (i have the canon 17-55mm). i only have a 35mm f/2 for my fs100 and it's been annoying the fuck out of me lately.
Oct 5 2011 6:11AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)