# Need a new lens for Nikon D60 for wide-angle



## Mech (Aug 22, 2011)

I have a Nikon D60 and mostly use an 80-200mm lens. I take photos for a marching band and also dabble in some sports photos as well, so I'm generally moving up and down the sideline. I am in the market for more of a wide-angle lens as the stock lens that came with it has trouble focusing, for when I need pics of people/groups up close. I really wanted to get a fisheye lens, but the person in charge of buying equipment for the band says that's not really a justifiable expense for some "unique" pictures (though, I really feel fisheye lenses are great at taking pictures of several people when there's not much room to back up, and do more than just take "unique" pictures). I take pretty good photos but I get overwhelmed when looking for lenses. So I am hoping you guys can help me pick out the best lens for my situation. 

What would be the best option? AF-S lenses would be the best, but we're also on a budget so nothing too expensive (which is also part of the challenge). If anyone knows of a good site or has specific links, that would also help.


----------



## D-B-J (Aug 22, 2011)

Tokina 11-16mm


----------



## chaosrealm93 (Aug 22, 2011)

10-24mm? AF-S DX NIKKOR 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5G ED | Nikon
12-24mm? Nikon | Imaging Products | AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED (2.0x)

i wouldnt go for a fisheye personally, i dont see the effect justifying the price.


----------



## Mech (Aug 22, 2011)

Thanks you two! I will look into these today.


----------



## tron (Aug 22, 2011)

Sigma 10-20 might be a good idea too. 

If price is a huge factor and you're on a super tight budget, try the rokinon 14mm


----------



## tron (Aug 22, 2011)

Also the sigma Is an hsm lens so it will autofocus on your d60 but the rokinon will not. The rokinon is the same thing as the samyang 14mm and pro-optic 14mm (just different names). The tokina will not autofocus on your d60, the nikon 10-24 and 12-24 will.


----------



## Mech (Aug 22, 2011)

Hey thanks Tron! Yeah, the other lenses suggested before yours are out of our price range a bit. I was just told under $500 if possible. Would this be the one I want? I didn't see anything about AF-S on it, but is HSM the same, but different terminology for the Sigma brand? 

Amazon.com: Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

is there much difference between that one and the below, besides the f-stop? 

http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-10-20mm...VSD6/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1314043744&sr=8-2


----------



## KmH (Aug 22, 2011)

Yes! Sigma HSM means there is an auto focus motor in the lens, like Nikon's AF-S.


----------



## christian.rudman (Aug 22, 2011)

I've loaned the 12-24 from work a few times in the last month, and I love it! I shoot with the Nikkor 10.5 Fisheye a bunch for skateboarding shots and nature stuff, but I can agree with the whole "too much money for the distortion" notion, I just actually have things I specifically need a fisheye effect for. The 12-24 is great on the wide people shots, used a bunch of times for party and group shots to include everyone in a tight space. I would push for Nikkor glass if possible, Sigma if you cant, and try like hell to stay away from the Tamron and Rokinon. Good luck on your hunt!


----------



## Mech (Aug 24, 2011)

Ended up getting the Sigma and a polarizing filter. Thanks again for your help!


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Aug 24, 2011)

Wise choice, from what I have seen the Sigma 10-20 is rated as slightly better than the Nikon anyway!


----------



## Mech (Aug 24, 2011)

Thanks, I really look forward to it. The stock lens I had that came with the camera, I think the motor was shot as it had a lot of trouble focusing and chest felt really cheap. So, it'll be nice to have something to use for the games other than a 200mm lens. 

One question I do have. I've never used a polarizing filter and have always used UV (since they're cheaper). There will be one football game at night (which will be professionally lit) where I'd like to get a shot of the stadium from the pressbox. Should I get a different filter other than the polarizing for use that night? Or just remove it for the pics I'd like to get?


----------



## orb9220 (Aug 24, 2011)

Mech said:


> Thanks, I really look forward to it. The stock lens I had that came with the camera, I think the motor was shot as it had a lot of trouble focusing and chest felt really cheap. So, it'll be nice to have something to use for the games other than a 200mm lens.
> 
> One question I do have. I've never used a polarizing filter and have always used UV (since they're cheaper). There will be one football game at night (which will be professionally lit) where I'd like to get a shot of the stadium from the pressbox. Should I get a different filter other than the polarizing for use that night? Or just remove it for the pics I'd like to get?



Polarizing or Circular Polarizing filters are a specific use filter and not to mounted all the time. The are designed to reduce glare and reflections as in photographing water as an example. And is not a general use filter like a UV. It is good to have one when needed but many have done without one.

Before buying filters you should research what the different types and uses are. Before plunking down cash on something you may not need or can use at the present moment.

Many purchase a UV filter for nothing else but protecting the front element and making it easier to clean the front element. Personally don't use them myself as rely on the Lens Hood which should be mounted at all times as protects from bumps and reduces flaring from side sources of harsh light like the sun.

UV filters tho can be problematic in night time types of shooting. As multiple light sources in the frame can setup secondary reflections and ghosting in the frame. And many recommend removing all filters for low light and night shooting.
.


----------



## KmH (Aug 24, 2011)

The image sensor in your camera has a UV filter built right in.

Putting a UV filter on the lens creates more problems than it solves. With digital, many use a UV filter for 'protection', but using the lens hood provided 'protection' and the lens hood improves lens performance while a UV filter won't improve lens performance but can sure degrade lens performance.

Circular Polarizing (CPL) filters are only effective at attenuating polarized light if the Sun is 90° to the lens axis, and less than 30° above the horizon.  Used outside those angles a CPL gives an uneven effect across the image frame


----------



## Mech (Aug 24, 2011)

orb9220 said:


> Mech said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks, I really look forward to it. The stock lens I had that came with the camera, I think the motor was shot as it had a lot of trouble focusing and chest felt really cheap. So, it'll be nice to have something to use for the games other than a 200mm lens.
> ...



Thanks for the tips! I am fairly certain a polarizing filter will see good use, as I will be taking pictures of a 200+ piece marching band with shiny instruments on sunny days, and will generally be around the noon hour. 

Thank you for reminding me of the lens hood, I am guessing that this new lens won't come with one. I do always have them on, so maybe I will try without a filter as well.


----------



## KmH (Aug 24, 2011)

Light reflecting off of metal, like "marching band with shiny instruments on sunny days" is not polarised. So a CPL will not be helpful with those reflections.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarizing_filters_(Photography)


----------

