Jump to content

What lens should I get?


Recommended Posts

Hi everyone! I'm going on a Florida/Bahamas cruise on my the NCL Gem this summer. This is my first cruise with a DSLR (Nikon D3100). Right now I only have the kit lens (18-55mm I believe) and I'm looking to rent another lens for the trip. Any recommendations?

 

Also, any recommendations for lens rental sites?

 

Thanks for your help!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you want to shoot? What is your budget? It is impossible to recommend anything until you give more info. The 18-55 you have is a fine lens, it gets a bad rep from the lens snobs, but used right and in good light it performs just fine for most people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I highly recommend LensRentals.com over any of the others. Their lens testing capabilities are so good that I will probably make future lens purchases from their rental inventory so that I only get a known-good lens. Their new "It's a Keeper" program lets you buy the lens you are renting, so you know exactly what you're getting.

 

Regardless, just go on over to their website, pick Nikon, pick Lenses, then pick the range(s) you might want and browse the products. Click on a few, and read the "Roger's Take". It's Roger's opinion (or occasionally another staff member's opinion) on the lens, in a very "man to man" honest style. His descriptions have ALWAYS been perfectly 100% on-the-money for every lens I've rented or bought from them (which is at least a dozen different models).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

either a telephoto or an ultra wide make sense to compliment what you have. It of course depends on what you like (i'm a wide angle guy myself)

 

of course its up to you but the 70-200mm 2.8 is a pretty big and heavy lens to carry around. The Nikon 70-300mm VR is a good alternative if you don't mind sacrificing "ultimate" image quality and don't need the fast 2.8 aperture.

 

Plus you get 100 extra mm of focal length (150 on DX)

 

70-200mm 2.8:

Dimensions (DxL) Approx. 3.4 x 8.1" (8.64 x 20.57 cm)

Weight 3.39 lb (1.54 kg)

 

70-300m 4.5 - 5.6 VR

Dimensions (DxL) Approx. 3.1 x 5.6" (7.87 x 14.22 cm)

Weight 1.64 lb (745 g)

 

From an ultrawide perspective the choices from Nikon are 10-24 or 12-24, I've used the 12-24 and it's very nice. the 10-24 is newer and supposedly a little better in all regards and 2mm wider

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is it you are hoping to achieve?

 

Ultra wide angle landscapes?

 

The 10-24..

 

Low light photographs?

 

A 1.4 prime or the Nikon 17-55/2.8 or the Sigma 18-35/1.8.

 

Amazing portraits?

 

The Nikon 85/1.4 is pretty darn perfect.

 

 

Telephoto reach?

 

The 70-300 VR is a decent choice. If you want really long reach, like birding, etc.. then the 80-400.

 

Indoor telephoto.. The 70-200/2.8.

 

The lens you would benefit from, entirely depends on what you're hoping to photograph.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

either a telephoto or an ultra wide make sense to compliment what you have. It of course depends on what you like (i'm a wide angle guy myself)

 

of course its up to you but the 70-200mm 2.8 is a pretty big and heavy lens to carry around. The Nikon 70-300mm VR is a good alternative if you don't mind sacrificing "ultimate" image quality and don't need the fast 2.8 aperture.

 

Plus you get 100 extra mm of focal length (150 on DX)

 

70-200mm 2.8:

Dimensions (DxL) Approx. 3.4 x 8.1" (8.64 x 20.57 cm)

Weight 3.39 lb (1.54 kg)

 

70-300m 4.5 - 5.6 VR

Dimensions (DxL) Approx. 3.1 x 5.6" (7.87 x 14.22 cm)

Weight 1.64 lb (745 g)

 

From an ultrawide perspective the choices from Nikon are 10-24 or 12-24, I've used the 12-24 and it's very nice. the 10-24 is newer and supposedly a little better in all regards and 2mm wider

 

 

I'm thinking I want a telephoto but then I think a wide angle will be better. A wide angle would probably be better for beach shots? I guess my question is if you could only have one additional lens for a Bahamas trip would it be a telephoto or wide angle?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you want to shoot? What is your budget? It is impossible to recommend anything until you give more info. The 18-55 you have is a fine lens, it gets a bad rep from the lens snobs, but used right and in good light it performs just fine for most people.

 

I'm probably going to mostly shoot landscapes and photos of the ship.

 

I've had no problems with it so far. I've had the camera for almost 3 years and the only time I've wanted something different was when on the safari at Animal Kingdom in Disney World. I wished I had a telephoto then.

Edited by bassclarinetgrl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with others so far that what you want to shoot, and what type of photography entertains you, should dictate what other lens or lenses to get, or rent.

 

Ultrawides are great fun for landscape closeup work, architecture in tight spaces, and unique perspectives - but also really require a bit of reading and practice to understand how to shoot with them (due to their huge depth of field and astoundingly close focus ability, you often have to place yourself much closer to something than you could imagine - and often having something very close in the foreground, and working with low angles and perspective, can add drama to UWA shots).

 

Telephotos would be advisable if you will be shooting more from the ship, from distances, want to shoot more closeup detail shots, are into wildlife or bird photography, etc. They're going to be much bigger and heavier to lug around, but if you want the reach, you're generally willing to give in on weight and bulk.

 

A fast prime tends to be most useful for handheld low light work, shallow depth of field work, and such.

 

I have friends who love ultrawides, but have so little interest in shooting far off subjects or wildlife that they don't have any idea why I'd lug around some of the long telephoto lenses I shoot with (I have long lenses ranging from 300mm to 600mm). At the same time, some of my birding friends don't understand why I'd want my ultrawides because all they shoot is birds, and could care less about landscape or architecture.

 

Decide what you like to shoot, or what you hope to shoot on this trip, and let that dictate what lens to get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm probably going to mostly shoot landscapes and photos of the ship.

 

I've had no problems with it so far. I've had the camera for almost 3 years and the only time I've wanted something different was when on the safari at Animal Kingdom in Disney World. I wished I had a telephoto then.

 

For Animal Kingdom, definitely telephoto.

 

For a beach, (and for the ship) my personal taste is ultrawide angle. But it's personal preference.

 

Some ship and beach ultrawide:

 

15110312912_82bb70e369_b.jpgDisney Fantasy Sunset by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

15011455828_be9d74c84b_b.jpgSun setting over the Disney Fantasy by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

14901480679_0b84131497_b.jpgDisney Fantasy at Castaway Cay by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

15264238847_1eb298c26d_b.jpguntitled-613.jpg by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

14947376947_d7c0594af3_b.jpgDisney Fantasy by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

And here is one telephoto:

 

15011449337_95aec9e1b4_b.jpgLifeguard in Paradise by Havoc315, on Flickr

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm thinking I want a telephoto but then I think a wide angle will be better. A wide angle would probably be better for beach shots? I guess my question is if you could only have one additional lens for a Bahamas trip would it be a telephoto or wide angle?

 

 

For me, beach scenery = wide as I can get (which at the moment is 16 and I expect will soon me 10mm :D ). I use my 70-300 only when I want to take a picture of something far away or what a sunset/sunrise with a giant fireball. I've taken it on cruises where it didn't even leave the bag.

 

You COULD look at the 55-200 or 55-300 as well. Smaller and cheaper lenses but will get the job done. I was quite happy with my Nikon 55-200 VR until I was given a 70-300 VR. The nice thing about the 55-200 is it is very light, takes up very little space and takes pretty decent shots for a $250.00 lens. The you can spend the "big" money on a 10-24 (was on sale last week for $709) for wide to ultra wide

 

Edit - oh right you were talking about renting - everything still applies, just ignore the part about actually buying a $7-800 lens

Edited by CT Sean
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For Animal Kingdom, definitely telephoto.

 

 

 

For a beach, (and for the ship) my personal taste is ultrawide angle. But it's personal preference.

 

 

 

Some ship and beach ultrawide:

 

 

 

15110312912_82bb70e369_b.jpgDisney Fantasy Sunset by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

 

 

15011455828_be9d74c84b_b.jpgSun setting over the Disney Fantasy by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

 

 

14901480679_0b84131497_b.jpgDisney Fantasy at Castaway Cay by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

 

 

15264238847_1eb298c26d_b.jpguntitled-613.jpg by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

 

 

14947376947_d7c0594af3_b.jpgDisney Fantasy by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

 

 

And here is one telephoto:

 

 

 

15011449337_95aec9e1b4_b.jpgLifeguard in Paradise by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

 

Ok thanks I will look at the ultra wides. BTW Love the photos, following you on Flickr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the Nikon D3200 along with the 18mm - 55mm and the 55mm to 200mm. I also have a 50mm Prime lens.

 

We are cruising in May and I just picked up a 18mm- 200mm for it. It is heavy but it's the only lens I'm taking with me as it should work for landscape and inside the cruise ship shots without have to change lenses.

 

Have a great time on your cruise and Happy Shooting!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the Nikon D3200 along with the 18mm - 55mm and the 55mm to 200mm. I also have a 50mm Prime lens.

 

We are cruising in May and I just picked up a 18mm- 200mm for it. It is heavy but it's the only lens I'm taking with me as it should work for landscape and inside the cruise ship shots without have to change lenses.

 

Have a great time on your cruise and Happy Shooting!!

 

It won't be very useful inside the ship... the aperture will be a bit slow. You'll need a good flash, or you might want to change to your 50/1.8 for inside the ship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi everyone! I'm going on a Florida/Bahamas cruise on my the NCL Gem this summer. This is my first cruise with a DSLR (Nikon D3100). Right now I only have the kit lens (18-55mm I believe) and I'm looking to rent another lens for the trip. Any recommendations?

 

Also, any recommendations for lens rental sites?

 

Thanks for your help!

 

You can go several routes, expanded zoom

1) 16-85, doesn't sound like much bout the extra 2mm on the wide over the 18 is huge. The long end is also significant. Unless you are really going to shoot wild life or scenic where you are far away should do well for you

2) 18-200, swiss army knife lense that has huge zoom on the long side.

Both are easily secured used from CL or eBAY . The 16-85 is optically one of the best zooms in the DX line.

 

Forget the suggestions for the 70-200 2.8 That is a huge and expensive lense which unless you shot sports or seriously isn't a vacation lense except for the most serious of photographers.

 

The suggestions of a 10-20 superwide makes shooting interiors or scenics fun.

 

All comes down to what you hope to add, the 18-55 is a very limiting lense, okay for snapshots, limiting for FOV changes.

 

Renting IMHO isn't worth it except for exotics and when you really know what you need and don't want to buy it. Used is often the easy way to secure a lightly used but useful lens for a good price, take care in those who hope to think you are a fool on pricing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It won't be very useful inside the ship... the aperture will be a bit slow. You'll need a good flash, or you might want to change to your 50/1.8 for inside the ship.

 

Nonsense unless you are a shaker the VR with D3200 cranked to 3200 ISO should yield reasonable portraits. If shooting shows is your goal then you'll need to spend some serious cash on both fast lenses and far more expensive body too :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nonsense unless you are a shaker the VR with D3200 cranked to 3200 ISO should yield reasonable portraits. If shooting shows is your goal then you'll need to spend some serious cash on both fast lenses and far more expensive body too :D

 

Depends on the interior lighting. In a brightly lit room, yes, you can get away with that. In dimmer interior lighting, even cranking up the ISO, you can only rely on stabilization so much -- your subjects can only stay so still. You can get away shooting at 100mm and 1/50 with stabilization, but with the aperture on that lens... you're not likely to get very good results. I doubt you'd get proper exposure at ISO 3200.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends on the interior lighting. In a brightly lit room, yes, you can get away with that. In dimmer interior lighting, even cranking up the ISO, you can only rely on stabilization so much -- your subjects can only stay so still. You can get away shooting at 100mm and 1/50 with stabilization, but with the aperture on that lens... you're not likely to get very good results. I doubt you'd get proper exposure at ISO 3200.

 

The newer sensors are pretty good to 6400 ISO, if you peep not so much for small prints and resized for flickr or FB more than good enough.

 

I've gotten good 6400 ISO on D700, and 12800 for D4/Df. The D3200 can go to high 1 IMHO pretty good resized. Unless your subject is a little kid running around latest VR is good for two stops + 6400 ISO at 1/30 can take some shots in some very poor lightening ..

 

I guess we are going to disagree on how low and how good...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The newer sensors are pretty good to 6400 ISO, if you peep not so much for small prints and resized for flickr or FB more than good enough.

 

I've gotten good 6400 ISO on D700, and 12800 for D4/Df. The D3200 can go to high 1 IMHO pretty good resized. Unless your subject is a little kid running around latest VR is good for two stops + 6400 ISO at 1/30 can take some shots in some very poor lightening ..

 

I guess we are going to disagree on how low and how good...

 

I don't think we disagree all that much. Using a slower lens, if you don't want to rely on flash, you will often need to crank up ISO to 3200-6400. (Assuming fairly normal interior lighting. In a darkened restaurant or bar, that still won't be enough). You are talking about full frame cameras -- and I'm comfortable as high as 12,800 on my D750. But on a D3200.... 3200-6400 are good enough for facebook. So yes, if are only looking for small prints or facebook images, then you're fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...