3 replies to this topic

[bbmaddie321]

Hi!! I'm an amateur photographer looking for a new lens to replace the 18-55 mm kit lens. Something I would be able to shoot snow, stars (basic astro photography), and portraits. Is there a lens that's pretty affordable and able to do all these things? Thank you!

[nbanjogal]

Hi bbmaddie, and welcome to the forums. What kind of budget do you have and what camera are you using?

 

You can shoot snow with any lens, as long as you're exposing it correctly, so I won't really address that part your question. But regarding the portraits and basic astro photography...I think you'll probably want two separate lenses. I shoot both of those subjects regularly and use very different lenses for each one. The good news is that you can get fairly inexpensive lenses for both. 

 

For the basic astro photography, I'm assuming you want to do something like Milky Way photos or other starry sky photos (anything more than that requires more equipment). You'll need a fast lens (try for at least f/2.8), and most people who shoot the Milky Way use a fairly wide angle lens so you can get more of the sky in your photo. I use either 14 or 24 mm lens for nightscapes. I often use this inexpensive wide angle lens:

 

https://www.bhphotov...ngle_f_2_8.html

 

Despite being inexpensive, it's actually a pretty good little lens. Super sharp! But you need to let in as much light as possible, so that's why the f2.8 is a minimum. 

 

Here are a few photos I've shot with that lens:

 

Milky Way Rising over Cathedral Gorge by Nicole Fernley, on Flickr

 

Swan Valley, Idaho, revisited by Nicole Fernley, on Flickr

 

Cathedral Gorge, Nevada by Nicole Fernley, on Flickr

 

You also mentioned that you wanted something to shoot portraits with. I shoot a lot of portraits and would almost* never use a wide angle for portraits. You get a lot of distortion in the face--it's not at all flattering, especially if you're shooting close in to your subject. I don't know what camera you have, but I would assume a crop sensor, so you could consider starting with a 50mm or an 85mm.  Both of those focal lengths can be had fairly inexpensively. The first lens I bought after I tired of my kit lens was a 50mm f/1.4. It's a very versatile lens that can do so much--you may want to consider it. It's not wide enough to get grand vistas of the night sky, but it can do almost anything else. For me it was a game changer. I hardly ever use it anymore, but once I had it, I never used the kit lens again. Ever.

 

So you might be asking, can't I just get a single lens like the 24-120? Yes...but it's more expensive than both the 14mm Rokinon I linked to AND a 50 or 85. You could have two decent lenses for the price of that one. It also maxes out at f/4, so you wouldn't get great results for astro photography. There are other ranges out there for multiple focal lengths in a single lens, but if you're on a tight budget, it's really hard to get one that has a big enough aperture for night sky photos. 

 

Anyway, I'm sure some of our other forum members will have some recommendations as well, so I'll leave them to it...

 

 

 

*almost=I did it once for a full-body shot because I was trying out the technique of Jeanloup Sieff, since he often shot wide angle portraits. Haven't done it since. Love his work, but it's not my style.

[Merco_61]

As it is the 18-55 you want to replace, I assume you have a DX body... This makes things a bit trickier as there are few really wide fast(ish) lenses when you take the crop factor into account. Nicole's 14 mm gives a FOV comparable to using a 21 mm on full frame when mounted on a DX body. The 11-xx zooms from Tokina come to mind, or the Rokinon/Samyang etc 10/2.8. These are relatively cheap, especially for what they can do.

 

If you want a nice lens for traditional portraits, a 50/1.4, 50/1.8 or an 85/1.8 can work well without breaking the bank, just remember that you need AF-S versions for the AF to work if you have a D3xxx or D5xxx body.

 

If you want to shoot detailed astro rather than sweeping vistas, things get really expensive fast as even a small servo-controlled telescope costs serious money and you need the target-following automation to get good photos.

 

 

Another question is why you feel the need to replace your kit zoom as they are nice little things, optically. If you want a walk-around lens with a bit more reach at the tele end and a bit wider at the wide end, the 16-85 isn't too expensive and performs well. It isn't a fast lens, so you won't have the blurry backgrounds for portraiture that a dedicated portrait prime can give, but it might be what you are looking for anyway.

[Russ]

Sigma 17-70 or Nikon 16-80 (both f2.8-4 I think), both offer wider and longer focal lengths. The Sigma focuses really really close too, so good for sort-of semi-macro shots.