alenko :
Christiaan Lourens :
I hear the D3200 can make pancakes too if you ask nicely so I'd definitely go for that 1...
However Do not and I mean NOT buy the kitlens that goes with it buy the body only...
You can rather get a better lens (be that a kit lens still, at least a better one than 18-55mm)
Take a larger focal range like the 55-200mm.
Although I wouldn't recommend any kit lenses I would recommend getting a 50mm f1.8 it's a super fast lens with great capabilities, all you need for zoom is your feet man...
but if you must get the 18-55mm, just remember I am recommending that you get the 50mm instead... or perhaps get the 35mm (it's more true to the smaller sensor (1.3 crop sensor)) your camera has (you will notice your lenses will say DX on them and not FX)
But woah who am I kidding you don't know anything about what I am talking about so let's simplify things here:
Get the Nikon it has more megapixels (usually more is better), try and get a different lens than the kit lens unless you absolutely have to (this will also save you money)
You are way away of this "correct" post,
you must know that 18-55 are cheap lens beacuse the make them alot, but far far better then any 55-200 etc...
For all time photography are 18-55 best, i have alot of lenses even alot of expensier and this lens are one of the best i ever used, lets talk of sharpnes that this lens can bring, its so clear you woudnt even think of buying anything else, with 55-200 not only that its not sharp, its not good for photos cuz of to big focal range, 55-200 on DX sensor i think it comes to 85-300 and thats only for wild photos chasing birds and so on, and for portrets the best you can get is 35mm 1.8 G DX so it comes o FX area of 50mm,
dont post if you are not some pro and telling stuff wrong to ppl that dont know,
and btw Ken Rockwell has reviewed lots of lenses so please go there find lenses and then talk if you dont belive to me.
Cheap is not always the worst, i had 1000€ lenses and sucked compered to 18-55.
And for MP more is better is far away from truth, google is your friend mate :=) and you will see what i want to tell you, and if you have camera 24mp test it with 24mp and 16mp and 13mp, you will see what i am talking about and noise stuff and max what you can use on pic
Are you for real? Not to be rude but I suggest learning English before criticizing my post as you clearly only understood half of what was said. Allot of points you make are things I myself agree with and some of it were said though not in the same words.
I am a professional photographer as I studied it for a few years, unlike you who so proudly claimed that Google is your friend. I agree there are many helpful sites on the internet, however there are just as many that give the wrong information and without ample knowledge that could be misleading.
If this were 2010 I would be inclined to agree with you about the Megapixels, however why did so many Pro Nikon photographers give up Nikon for the Canon 5D Mk II? ...the answer is simple Megapixels. 25Mp use to sound like overkill until it was compared and the 12MP sensors just don't compete, why do you think Nikon actually went on and finally increased their MP? Why do you think I suggested it for our friend here? Because to someone who is not professional that would be the wisest option, as he does not have all the technical savvy so if he makes a mistake or doesn't zoom in in time, ect. the Megapixels will allow for a decent crop.
There is no Pro photographer in the world that will agree with you that the 18-55mm is the sharpest lens they have ever used, it is sharp (I agree with that, however for a amateur photographer sharpness is not as important as covering a larger focal range so that he does not have to switch lenses which is why I suggested the 55-200mm, the loss in sharpness is marginal).
Nothing is sharper than a prime lens... Nothing so please do not go around and spread wrongful facts, you are misleading people. Rather not give advice if you are uncertain about something.
I admire your enthusiasm and passion, but merely having an opinion does not justify spreading false facts and possibly wasting other people's money...
I only own one 1000Euro lens that would be the 105mm but I own many other lenses.
I own the following Nikkor lenses: 10.5mm, 50mm 1.4G, 85mm, 105mm,14-24mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm, I think it's safe to say I know my lenses...
I still have my 18-55mm but I have not used it since I bought my first lens, so the thing about the 18-55mm is merely opinion, I liked it, you love it, that's what's great about photography people differ, people can take the same shot but it won't be the same merely because no one sees anything the same way.
To address some other things you mentioned:
As for portraiture pro's use both the 50mm and 85mm, most preferring the 85mm. the closest focal range to that would be the 50mm and look I did suggest that, if he needs to zoom out with that lens he can just move around. 35mm is more the standard lens equivalent. If he ever decides to go FX sensor now he has no use for his 35mm camera lens because he didn't buy the 50mm? What a shame.
55-200 is not just for birds it is for general purpose same as the 18-55mm. Remember most amateur photographers stand still and do not move about as much thus this is the go to choice. Advise apropriately my friend.
As for noise, I can suggest a tripod, off camera flash for that no need in buying a Nikon 4DS not everyone are millionaires or do this for a living .
Facebook
Twitter