Lens advice for d500

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Aussie Geoff

Aussie Geoff

Melbourne Australia
Member's gallery
Hi Steve and all
I have just upgraded from the Nikon D80 to the Nikon D500 I like taking photos when out with the family of wildlife, landscape and waterfalls and some sports.
all my lenses are the basic kit lens except for my Sigma 150-600mm contemporary.
( I use the sigma for taking photos of people surfing or landscape ) now I am after a good lens for wildlife and one for indoors and low light.
The only lens that comes to my mind is the Nikon 200-500mm lens for wildlife and the zoo but have no idea about a small lens, any advice would be greatly appreciated.
 
Member's gallery
Congratulations on your new camera! You mentioned wanting lenses for wildlife, landscapes, and low light situations. I don't think the Nikon 200-500 would give you much that your Sigma 150-600 doesn't already have, and the Sigma is a fine enough wildlife lens. On the shorter range, the Nikon 24-70 f2.8 ED VR is an excellent workhorse of a lens - great for landscapes & people, and general photography. If you wanted a lens specifically for landscapes, then you might consider a wide angle lens, such as the Nikon 16-35 f4, or the Nikon 14-24 f2.8. Honestly, I'd pick the 24-70 first, before going the wide angle route - I think it is a more versatile lens, and would get more use. Good luck in your deliberations!
 
Member's gallery
Aussie Geoff said:
Hi Steve and all
I have just upgraded from the Nikon D80 to the Nikon D500 I like taking photos when out with the family of wildlife, landscape and waterfalls and some sports.
all my lenses are the basic kit lens except for my Sigma 150-600mm contemporary.
( I use the sigma for taking photos of people surfing or landscape ) now I am after a good lens for wildlife and one for indoors and low light.
The only lens that comes to my mind is the Nikon 200-500mm lens for wildlife and the zoo but have no idea about a small lens, any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...
I would give the 17-55mm f2.8 consideration this is an optically suited for the DX format of the D500, I have had one for several years, super fast focusing, pin sharp and a real gem of a lens, use mine for 75% of all my shots, hard to get new now, but plenty on the used market. Good luck in your quest.
 
Member's gallery
Aussie Geoff said:
now I am after a good lens for wildlife and one for indoors and low light.
The only lens that comes to my mind is the Nikon 200-500mm lens for wildlife and the zoo but have no idea about a small lens, any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...
As others have posted you seem well covered for wildlife with your 150-600mm, it's a fine wildlife lens. For a smaller indoor lens, do you want real small and what sort of photos do you think you'll be after indoors? For indoors you'll want a fast (large wide open aperture) lens like an f/2.8 lens or even faster. If you expect to do a lot of portrait style work something in the 85mm or thereabouts can be a good choice like an 85mm f/1.8 lens. If you expect to shoot a lot of group shots or indoor spaces then a wider angle lens like the 16-55 or something like that makes a lot more sense. If you're just covering your bases to have a solid lens collection then something covering the 24-120mm range and something ultra wide for landscapes, architecture, indoor work starting very wide is handy but it really depends on your photo interests. For really nimble and small medium focal length lenses, for instance for street photography on a D500 I'd look for something in the 24mm to 35mm range and likely a prime (non-zoom) lens to keep it small and compact.

Remember that 1.5x DX crop factor applies to the wide end of the range as well so a 35mm lens on a D500 has a field of view similar to a 50mm lens(52.5) on a full frame camera, IOW plan your wide lenses a bit wider than what you might see recommended for full frame bodies.

Not sure what kit lenses you already have, but one good approach is to just shoot with what you have and then ask yourself what you think is missing and what shots you might have captured if you had different lenses. For instance if you have a mid range kit lens zoom but are missing shots because you don't have a wide enough lens to capture scenes in tight places or you're missing shots because your current lens is an f/5.6 lens and you find yourself regularly shooting in low light and wishing for more light collection then start looking for lenses that fill those particular needs. It's really tempting at first to just buy lenses to cover the whole range from super wide angle to super long telephoto (which you already have covered with your 150-600mm) but unless you have a ton of money to burn I'd suggest concentrating on where your current lens lineup is falling short for you and fix those shortcomings.
 
Member's gallery
Aussie Geoff said:
Hi Steve and all
I have just upgraded from the Nikon D80 to the Nikon D500 I like taking photos when out with the family of wildlife, landscape and waterfalls and some sports.
all my lenses are the basic kit lens except for my Sigma 150-600mm contemporary.
( I use the sigma for taking photos of people surfing or landscape ) now I am after a good lens for wildlife and one for indoors and low light.
The only lens that comes to my mind is the Nikon 200-500mm lens for wildlife and the zoo but have no idea about a small lens, any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the help and advice the small lens is more for party and Christmas photos indoors, The kit lenses don't seem to give me as sharp / clear photos as they did on the old D80 . I am now thinking about the 16-35 F4 G ED VR
 
Member's gallery
As other have said since you already have the 150-600 the 200-500 doesn't bring anything to the party. There are countless debates on that topic which in and of itself IMO suggests that they are very similar in performance. If you're looking to truly "up your game" for wildlife photography the logical step is a prime lens. And as many posts in this forum will argue the D500 and either the 300PF or 500PF are an awesome match. At one time I had all three 200-500, 500mm f4G, and 500mm PF at the same time along with a D500. The only one of those lenses I still have is the 500PF simply because after I got it the other two were just collecting dust.

If you're considering the 16-35 f4 you may also want to take a look at the 18-35 f3.5-4G ED. If you look on some of the test sites it compares favorably on performance with the 16-35 f4 and is one of those great bargains that Nikon accidentally releases now and then when considering cost/performance. And it is really light weight. But the light weight and low cost are due to no VR if that is important to you. I only use mine on a tripod shooting landscape so not of importance to me.
 
Member's gallery
bluebird said:
I would give the 17-55mm f2.8 consideration this is an optically suited for the DX format of the D500, I have had one for several years, super fast focusing, pin sharp and a real gem of a lens, use mine for 75% of all my shots, hard to get new now, but plenty on the used market. Good luck in your quest.
Click to expand...
I'll add another vote for the Nikkor AF-S DX 17-55mm f/2.8 G ED . I purchased a used one for my D500 and it is a worthy lens, Great optics, image and build quality. A workhorse.
 
Member's gallery
The versatility and quality of the shots I get from my 16-80 give it my vote as well. I shoot the D 7500 which shares the same sensor as the D500. At 16 mm you get an equivalent field of view of 24mm on full frame so you can take some pretty decent wide angle shots as well.
 
Member's gallery
Aussie Geoff said:
Thanks for the help and advice the small lens is more for party and Christmas photos indoors, The kit lenses don't seem to give me as sharp / clear photos as they did on the old D80 . I am now thinking about the 16-35 F4 G ED VR
Click to expand...

Pity you are not in the UK. I've got a mint 17-55 f2.8 that I want to sell. It is a great lens and when I had a DX camera it lived on it.

Current UK price is £1479:

Nikon AF-S DX 17-55mm f2.8G Lens Best UK Price - Compare Prices Here - UK Stock

Compare new UK prices from £1350.31. Used prices from £124.00. Real UK Stock. Price alerts. Find the best price today.
www.camerapricebuster.co.uk

Save over £1000 - I want £450 posted to UK mainland addreses.
 
Member's gallery
16-80 f2.8-4 is the real deal, 17-55 is a serious runner up for me. No others get my consideration (I've owned and returned/sold several of the other suggestions).
 
Member's gallery
Aussie Geoff said:
Hi Steve and all
I have just upgraded from the Nikon D80 to the Nikon D500 I like taking photos when out with the family of wildlife, landscape and waterfalls and some sports.
all my lenses are the basic kit lens except for my Sigma 150-600mm contemporary.
( I use the sigma for taking photos of people surfing or landscape ) now I am after a good lens for wildlife and one for indoors and low light.
The only lens that comes to my mind is the Nikon 200-500mm lens for wildlife and the zoo but have no idea about a small lens, any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...
I like the 500pF for wildlife and any long range shooting, especially birds in flight. I like the 70-200 FL f 2.8 for almost anything else. (I own other glass but these two get the most use).
 
Member's gallery
You mentioned some sports so an f2.8 is pretty much a necessity. Many years ago I purchased a 50 f1.8 D and then added the 35 f1.8 DX to use with my D500. I have gotten a lot of good use out of these lenses in low light settings.
 
Member's gallery
sinewsworn said:
I like the 500pF for wildlife and any long range shooting, especially birds in flight. I like the 70-200 FL f 2.8 for almost anything else. (I own other glass but these two get the most use).
Click to expand...
Whilst these are both great lenses, they would be a fair jump from where Aussie Geoff is at the moment. In Australia that pair of lenses will currently set you back almost AUD $9000.
 
Member's gallery
I use a D500 with F 70-200 2.8 and Z6ii with Z 24-70 2.8 for high school sports. For all indoor amateur sports you will need fast lenses because the lighting is inferior to professional arenas. The Nikkor 17-55 2.8 would allow you to do sports and family shots both indoors and outdoors. I recommed you get that first and then add the 70-200 2.8. Those two lenses along with your existing Sigma will cover all your needs.
 
Member's gallery
bluebird said:
I would give the 17-55mm f2.8 consideration this is an optically suited for the DX format of the D500, I have had one for several years, super fast focusing, pin sharp and a real gem of a lens, use mine for 75% of all my shots, hard to get new now, but plenty on the used market. Good luck in your quest.
Click to expand...
I agree with you! I bought a used one four years ago, half the price of a new one, and I love it even if it's heavy for a wild angle.
 
Member's gallery
For indoors and low light the 24-70mm f/2.8 is a great lens. On the D500 it functions like a 36-105mm lens in terms of the view angles but only a problem when photographing groups of people in smallish spaces. For general people photography it provide the ideal range of 85mm to 105mm.

For wildlife there are many choices and a lot depends on the size of the critters. For small birds the 200-500mm provides a larger image size but for medium to large land and marine mammals the 80-400mm lens works much better and allows one to include the animal's surroundings. Often with the 200-500mm lens and the D500 I found myself removing the lens and putting on the 80-400mm as the picture angle at 200mm was too tight for my subjects. At Yellowstone and Costa Rica the 80-400mm was the zoom lens I have used by far the most.
 
Member's gallery
RE: and one for indoors and low light.

I bought the Nikon AF-S 20mm 1.8 for Milky Way and other night time photography and I absolutely love it. No more 30 second exposures. Last Spring I shot in Utah near Zion and got some wonderful ten second exposures of the night sky. My stars were actually pinpoint stars, not the short streaks I got at 30 seconds...

I think it was about $700 back then, no idea what it would be today, but it takes great photos in the dark, and also when shooting landscapes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top