File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Dear /p/ looking for some advice,

I'm new to photography and just got myself a D40x, wither that was the right choice or not, i'm not sure, but it's done.

Currently i've only got the standard 18 - 55mm Lens and i'm thinking of buying another, but the world of lens seems vast.

Does /p/ reccomend any particular lens / brands, bearing in mind that i'm am an amateur and don't have alot of money to spend?

Thanks.
>> Anonymous
Prime lenses are generally cheaper, 50mm f/1.8 is a good one. I have one but its not AF-S, so I'm stuck with manual focus.
>> Anonymous
Just be aware that certain lenses don't work with the D40 (not sure which)
>> Anonymous
Is that a Nikkor lens, or another brand ?

I have noticed that for a AF-S lens your looking at quite a bit more, cash wise.

Also can I mount for example a cannon lens on the D40x ? I've heard that adapters exist.
>> Anonymous
Argh, above post was OP refering too the lens mentioned in :
>>76318
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>76319
all lenses work with the D40(x) just non AF-I and AF-S lenses will be MF, but still will work.
>> Anonymous
Well, you have a wide lens. Maybe I'd recognize a tele one for closetups and portraiture, then.

More importantly, I'd recommend a bucket full of filters. Polarizing filters, ND grad filters, etc. They can drastically improve your photos, and are "cheap" in comparison to other photo tools.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>76320
Nope. You can go the other way to a certain extent, though. But the math doesn't work out to make an adapter to mount Canon lenses on Nikon cameras.

>>76317
Lens brand I'd recommend: Nikon.
>> Anonymous
Before you buy another lens, perhaps you should determine what kind of lens you want. Beginners always want to build up a bag full of equipment, but usually have no idea why they actually need the gear.

In what situations is your 18-55mm lacking? Are you determining this from personal experience or because someone told you it's not good enough for a particular situation?
>> Anonymous
OP here, firstly, thanks for all the useful info.

Secondly, I'm a product designer so in turn I mainly shoot inanimate objects, products that sort of thing. Sometimes I own the item so I can shoot it at my leisure other times it's through shop windows and stuff like that. On special occasions I even shoot the object in use :O

The main issues i'm having with the 18-55mm lens is it's not giving me a certain crisp-ness that I think i'm missing, a certain finish, basically all my photos still look like i'm using a point and shoot.

Of course this could be that i'm just a poor photographer :P

Thanks again, op.
>> Anonymous
If you want dirt cheap glass, there are some Soviet lenses (usually with "?" at the end of the designation) that fit Nikons. Lenses with "A" in the same place can be used on Nikons with a very obscure interchangeable mount.
>> Anonymous
>>76327
The problem isn't only in math. For example, it is theoretically possible to make an EF-4/3 adapter which will retain infinity focus, but no one actually makes it because all EF lenses require power and rather complex electronic interface to work.
>> Best Do-Everything Lens for D40x Redwin
I have the exact same camera, and its an absolutely excellent choice for a newbie SLR photographer. If you want to be able to use 1 lens for everything, with both good macro and telephoto qualities, along with nikon's amazing vibration reduction built into the lens, i highly reccommend the
"Nikkor AF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G IF-ED VR II DX"

I know that's a mouthful, and its a prtty expensive lens, but it literally does everything you will ever need to do with your camera. If you buy chepaer lens with less ranges, you will need 3-4 of them to do everything those lens does, and if you get all those lenses with VR built in, they will cost a lot more than just getting this one.
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/nikkor_18200_3556vr/index.htm
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>76364
What aperture are you shooting at? The kit lenses are generally sharpest around f/8.
>> Anonymous
>>76364it's not giving me a certain crisp-ness that I think i'm missing, a certain finish

While the 18-55 is certainly not the sharpest lens on earth, it's not bad either. I strongly suspect that your problem lies in post processing and lighting rather than equipment.

DSLRs require a fair amount of post processing to get top notch results. Generally it's necessary to adjust white balance, colors, contrast, and sharpening after the fact. I really like Adobe Lightroom because of it's user interface, but there are a wide variety of programs out there that will do what you need.

Second, lighting is often underemphasized. Particularly with product still life work, good lighting is absolutely essential. There are numerous books on the subject.

In short, the 18-55 should be fine for most product work other than specialty (really big or really small) stuff.
>> Anonymous
>>76382it literally does everything you will ever need to do with your camera.

It's a nice lens, but it's hardly the be-all-end-all lens of lenses that you're making it out to be. On the negative side for that lens; it's slow, it's expensive, it's relatively large and heavy, and it's not as sharp and has more distortion that shorter range zooms in the same price bracket.

I wouldn't mind having one (in addition to other lenses), but there are a lot of situations in which the 18-200 is not the ideal lens.
>> Anonymous
Op, again.
More awesome responses, thanks.

>>76382
That lens does look pretty epic! Although I think i'll need to save up a bit for that one $700 is a bit over budget at the moment.

>>76383
I'm shooting mainly between f5/6, and here in lies the problem.

>>76384
Lighting! I work in a small basement studio with a small window. I mean it's not a cave I have lights and stuff, but very little natural light.

Should I buy an external flash, or several? Or can I acheive similar results simply with desk lamps and post processing? Or alternativly shooting outside :P

I've also noted down Adobe Lightroom, i'll have a dig and see if I can find a copy on the cheap, also do you reccomend any particular books or will a google on still life lighting be an appropriate move?

You can tell i've got along way to go can't you.
I'll get there in the end, OP.
>> elf_man !fBgo7jDjms
>>76443
Check strobist for a diy macro studio, it has all kinds of ideas for high quality off-camera lighting with minimal equipment.
>> Anonymous
Getting a flash is always a good idea, since it's a versatile lighting tool. It's a great fill/hard light.
>> Anonymous
>>76443Should I buy an external flash, or several? Or can I acheive similar results simply with desk lamps and post processing?

Desk lamps will work with non-moving subjects. You'll probably have to use a tripod because you'll get fairly slow shutter speeds when the lens is stopped down with little light.

The same basic principles apply to photographic lighting whether you're using desk lamps or top of the line radio controlled strobes. There are probably websites that can give you the basics, and as I stated before there are numerous books on the subject.