Nikon Lenses


Well-Known Member
New Jersey
hello all,

My mother gave me her old camera, Nikon D70, and I'm starting to look into lenses. I just purchased the Nikon 105mm f/2.8D AF Micro-Nikkor Lens and I'm looking for possible others.

I want a good lens for landscapes/skies and maybe one for distance.

I was thinking of the Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor Lens for landscapes.

Any ideas?

What do you think of the lenses I mentioned/just bought.


Well-Known Member
Vehicle Model
Civic SI
Body Style
I would stay away from a 50 for landscapes. You want something wide look into a Tokina 11-16MM F2.8. I believe you would have to go with the second edition to make it autofocus. As far as distance goes a Nikon 70-200 2.8 is nice or since its a DX body a Sigma 50-150 is nice as well.

The lense you mentioned before the 50 F1.8 would be good for portraits and things like that.


Toys For Tots
I would agree with ^. I'd go wider than 50mm if you're looking to do landscapes. You're also dealing with a 1.5x crop factor. So, a 50mm lens will really be comparable to 75mm lens on a standard camera. If you go with a 11-16mm lens as mentioned above, that's really like a 16.5-24mm on your camera body. That'd be a great wide angle lens for landscapes.

Distance lenses - that's where your crop factor is a help. You can buy whatever zoom you want, and you will gain 1.5x on top of the figure. So, if you go with something like a 200mm lens, it'll actually give you a 300mm lens when you figure the crop.

I don't know the nikon lens catalog, but I know dentrecords is very familiar with their products.


Polar Bear
VIP Member
I think a 50mm is a fine lens for all around shooting, and that *can* include landscapes, but is not always ideal for it.

Seeing the D70 is a DX camera, a 35mm 1.8 would be akin to a "normal" field of view in the lens (that is, what your eye sees, not wider, not more compressed). If you're eventually thinking of going with an FX body like a D600/D800, it's not a bad plan to future proof yourself with a 50mm FX compatible lens, but you are trading off the "normal" view and going into a telephoto range with this body.

I hate to say it, but the 18-55 VR is a perfectly fine all around lens and is quite inexpensive - this is why they are packaged by default on new DX DSLRs... An ultrawide lens like a sigma 10-20mm or the Nikon 10-24 is a LOT of fun, but it is also very limited in comparison to the 18-55 and costs 4-5x as much at least. I honestly find myself using the equivalent of the 18-55 on my camera more often than not, but I do have the wide angle and longer telephoto for when it's worthwhile. If you can swing it, the 18-300 is a crazy all around lens to have and is hilarious for travel since you cover such an insane range.

If you're looking for ultimate sharpness and future proofing, look for lenses like the 24-70mm f/2.8, but you're going to spend huge gobs of money on a single lens.

I see you've already got the 105mm macro, which is the lens that got me going into the pro stuff... I suppose it is really a matter of budget and interest versus what your needs are.


Well-Known Member
Sunny D-eggo
Vehicle Model
Civic Si
Body Style
Depends on budget really... If landscape is more your thing 24-70mm f2.8 zoom by Nikon is the business. However if you want to go slightly cheaper, you can go with the Tamron 24-70mm zoom lens. They aren't as sharp, however the Image Stabilizer in the lens is second to none. By far the best stabilizing system in all lenses. Sharpness, vignetting, and distortion may be in issue as where the nikon 24-70mm is unmatched in those departments.

Since you are on a DX body... I have a d5100, and I found that the 24-70mm is effective, however I've grown to fall in love with the 14-24mm f2.8 zoom lens. So much more wider and you can get way better compositions in your photos. Also, the distortion on that lens adds a nicer overall tone to your photos. Again, budget is something that is a factor. all of those lens listed above go for roughly $1200 and higher.

On a budget- go for the VR 18-55mm varied aperture zoom lens... Yes, photos arent gonna be "bokeh-licious" but they will give you the nice field of view you desire.

Then there's prime lenses you can look at. However they arent as versatile as zoom lenses. (your feet will do the zooming lol) But the lower f stops on prime lens are unrivaled compared to zoom lenses. For Nikon the 24mm f1.4 af-s g is a SUPER SEXY lens. But is unconventional when you compare pricing to zoom lenses.

Can't go wrong with any lens really. It's all up to you and how you set up your shot. Happy shooting!

P.S. the bulbous front element on that 14-24mm f2.8 Nikon lens makes all photographers cream their pants. haha


How may I help?
Keystone State
I've used 300mm and 600mm lenses when I used to shoot wildlife. The 600 is a big-*** piece of glass, and can be very expensive - especially at the lowest f-stops, but is great if you need to shoot from long distance.

300mm f2.8 ($5900)


600mm f4.0 ($10,000)




Well-Known Member
Sunny D-eggo
Vehicle Model
Civic Si
Body Style
Lol! You do realize with the crop factor a 300mm will be 450mm and a 600mm is a 900mm on his dx body? Hahaha that's a giant magnifying glass.