D40 Lens Log Out | Topics | Search | Register | Edit Profile | User List
Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Moderators | Help/Instructions
WakeWorld Discussion Board » Audio, Video and Photography » Archive through February 15, 2009 » D40 Lens « Previous Next »
By Nick Tomsyck (sidekicknicholas) on Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - 12:36 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Just got this camera and I wanted a lens that will be good for shooting a wakeboarder (subject at like 75ft.) any suggestions would be great thanks
By scott a (scott_a) on Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - 7:04 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
70-200mm is the range you should look for.
By Chris Anthony (cmawsr) on Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - 9:01 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Since Nikon doesn't make an f4 version of the 70-200, and the 2.8 is very pricey, you may have to look at a 70-300 variant. Just remember that most of the older nikon lenses will not autofocus on a d40 body. do your research before purchasing.
By Peter Chandler (peter_c) on Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - 9:23 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
NOT an 18-200mm I rather dislike mine, but it does work well for things like backpacking when I can only carry one lens. F3.5-5.6 does not cut it for many lower light shots though.

Something with an F2.8 is nice to have, although expensive. The 70-200mm is a lens on my short list.

Remember this; you will spend much more on glass than the camera itself. There are "other" lens' that work from companies like Tokina, Sigma, Tamron, etc. that are much more affordable than Nikkor lens'.

You can get non auto focus lens' cheap if the D40 accepts them. For more money image stabilization (IS, VR or whatever the flavor of the day is) works great at high zoom levels.

Knowing your budget would help determine what lens you can get.

By Rich Dykmans (richd) on Wednesday, November 21, 2007 - 7:59 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
On a 1.6X crop body a shorter lens is fine from the boat as well.
By A. P. (bigdad) on Wednesday, November 21, 2007 - 11:05 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
Don't forget the Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8. But at $900 it isn't cheap.

Have you guys ever seen these big lenses on the small D40 body? Looks very odd.

On a serious note. Wakeboarding will be typically done on a bright sunny day. So low light should not be an issue. So a lens like the Nikkor 55-200


is not a bad option. Inexpensive but will get the job done. Shoot it in low light and you will see why we push these other expensive lenses.

By Nate (mammoth) on Tuesday, November 27, 2007 - 6:10 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
I just upgraded from the "standard" Nikor 55-200 to VR. Haven't had a chance to take it out on the boat yet, but suspect that the VR will be a welcome addition. Ken Rockwell has reviewed 55-200VR and talks about it as one of his favorites.

The 55-200 works out great on a boat, even for someone like me who is just stumbling his way through the learning process. The zoom range lets you get nice tight shots of riders, but it also backs out for some really nice in-boat portraits.

This inexperienced uneducated hack shooter would highly recommend it for it's bang-for-the-buck, especially for use in the boat.

By Phantom (phantom5815) on Tuesday, November 27, 2007 - 5:32 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Psssst.... Don't ever use Ken Rockwell as a reference on this site.
There's a few ( Scotta for one) who will bash you for quoting him

By Rich Dykmans (richd) on Tuesday, November 27, 2007 - 7:27 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Every inexpensive Nikon lens made is a Rockwell "favorite" but I'd still like to see some shots from your new lens to judge for myself.

I'm a big IS (VR on the Nikon) fan but as many have pointed out it's not necessary at high shutter speeds. If you shoot slow enough for the VR to be effective you'll find your rider is movement blurred.

By Nate (mammoth) on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 - 10:52 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
They can bash all they want. I really don't care what anyone here thinks of my photography knowledge. I have little to none and will gladly admit it. I do like to look at a variety of sources, and Rockwell's comments about that particular lens and the use of VR in general seemed useful. If someone wants to bash me for that, maybe I'll learn even more!

Rich - I just got the lens and don't expect to get a good chance to shoot from the boat any time soon. I also doubt that you could use my shots for a valuable comparison, as I'm not good enough to setup the scene and gear to get apples-apples. I do believe what your saying to be mostly true, most of the shots with the standard lens were sharp enough for my eyes. My upgrade was "free", Costco changed the kit lens before my 90 days was up.

At any rate, the focal range on the 55-200 (VR or not), seems to make for a great budget lens for on and off the boat.

These aren't so great, but handy and demonstrate the range of the lens.



(Message edited by mammoth on November 28, 2007)

By Rich Dykmans (richd) on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 - 7:38 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
I'm not dogging your new lens, but most pros, including Nikon using pros, think Ken Rockwell is an idiot. If Thom recommends it then I would certainly take notice and give it a roll if I was a Nikon guy.

I've always maintained one should start with a less expensive lens and work up when you find what you have just isn't doing the job. I agree that is a great range for that body and your post was right on until you mentioned Rockwell! Upload

By Nate (mammoth) on Thursday, November 29, 2007 - 6:03 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
Then let me change my reference so my comments fit in with cool kids.

From Thom's 'Quick Evaluation': "VR Version: Highly Recommended; but you get what you pay for."

Pros also don't shoot with D40s, so I assumed budget was a consideration. Might have been a stupid assumption.

By Rich Dykmans (richd) on Thursday, November 29, 2007 - 7:07 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
Sorry I wasn't trying to be cool here just point out my disdain for rockwell. (Phantom was right above!)

As far as pros using the D40, I'm sure there are many using it just like there are many pros I have conversed with using the XT/XTi as a second/backup body.

Given his budget I'd agree you made a good recommendation and I'd say Thom is right on the money with his take because when it comes to Canon/Nikkor lenses there are very few that outperform their price range (regardless of what Rockwell says.)

You'll get honest reviews out of Thom, Rob Galbraith, Bob Atkins etc, Rockwell is the biggest tool on the face of the earth.

By Nate (mammoth) on Thursday, November 29, 2007 - 9:04 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
Thanks for the pointers to a few more sources. As I said above, I'm first to admit I'm at the bottom of the learning curve. It's nice to have places to do some reading when I have time to kill.

So...not to hijack, but I have another D40(x) lens question. Where should a newbie on a budget look for a fisheye? I'm considering a rental to play around since they all seem to be fairly expensive. Familiar with any decent budget options?

By scott a (scott_a) on Thursday, November 29, 2007 - 1:24 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Yes...Rockwell is a complete assclown. Go read his 18-200 Nikon lens review if you don't believe me.

Anyone remember what forum it was where people were joking that Canon might secretly be paying him so that he can continue to spew the most ridiculous things about Nikon?

By Chris Anthony (cmawsr) on Thursday, November 29, 2007 - 5:24 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
How about the "you don't need a tripod with digital" or " a p&s is as good or better then the 5D"
By Rich Dykmans (richd) on Thursday, November 29, 2007 - 5:28 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Do a search on the Russian made fisheye's, they are the cheapest, next up from that are the sigma 's which are supposed to be pretty good. Then of course comes the 8mm Nikon which is the ultimate for a crop body. Keep in mind you don't get a whole lot of fish effect with a std 15mm FE on a crop body.
Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions Administration
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use
WakeSpace is owned by eWake, Inc.
Copyright © 1996 - 2008, All Rights Reserved.