Lenses for NikonD200

tincat2

tincat2

Active Member
I would appreciate some advice on inexpensive yet some amount of quality lenses for my inherited D200. New, refurb, or used; whatever offers the best performance and value. Would like zoom capability and clarity at high magnification. Autofocus is subservient to quality as long as the lens causes no glitches in the camera's functioning. I realize I am pretty much in ignorance here, but throw what you got at me and I will be grateful.
 
That's certainly an interesting avenue for investigation. Need a body cap and what size for the hole?
 
I'd recommend you read a review or two of your camera, ignorance is bliss but knowledge is power.
A lot of people don't care for KR, but he does a pretty good job of describing the basics.

https://kenrockwell.com/nikon/d200lenses.htm

I have an 18-200 VR lens and it was all I used for a lot of years on my D7000. It is a great all around lens if you only want to invest in one lens while you get up to speed on what you think you might like.
I now mostly shoot old Nikon glass on my Sony A7ii, and they should work on your D200 as well. I've found older Nikkor's to be very sharp in most cases and a lot of them are relatively cheap too.
Lenses I think you might like are: Nikon Micro Nikkor 55mm 2.8 (super sharp and it can do macro too), Nikon Series E 100mm and 50mm are sharp and light weight too.

Again, educate yourself some and then come back and ask more questions if you have any.
 
Thanks, Old Ears, that is a helpful link and I expect to get a feel for 'whatsup' in Nikon lenses. I don't see myself as a talented or particularly dedicated photographer, but, as with my other interests, I like to feel that I know what I am doing to the extent that I can do what I want to do. I live in the mountains(large hills compared to the Rockies or Andes) and the scenery and creatures around me offer many images which focus memories when caught by the camera. The 55mm 2.8 you mention sounds like a good start('super sharp' speaks to me) and I will be looking into closeup tech as well. Money is an issue as it is with most people but sometimes things can be worked out. Again, thanks for your thoughts.

Edit: Oh, yes, what's a good source for the older Nikon stuff you mention? One of my mantras is that, for the most part, "older is better".
 
Last edited:
I got my 55 off of the goodwill.com site. You have to pay close attention to the pictures, but after a while you can see what is good and what isn't. I was very lucky to get a 'minty' lens. You might have to buy a camera just to get the lens you want, but that is what Craig's List is for, unwanted cameras you just want to dump.
The Micro Nikkor is known for being one of the sharpest lenses ever made. Google it.

https://www.shopgoodwill.com/

KEH and Adorama also have used gear too.
 
Last edited:
When you get into close up (macro) work you can get carried away.
Here's setup I put together from things bought off of the goodwill site, everything except the wood mount and camera.
IMG_0616.JPG
Just takes patience to find the stuff sometimes.
 
Ordered the 55 off ebay. Cheap enough and full functionality with no real defects(this may be my first lesson, but you gotta start somewhere). Sounds like it came off a film camera, so that may indicate an amount of vintage goodness I desire.
What's a ballpark figure on the bellows setup and what would be a good search term for it or its components? I enjoy mechanical assemblage and I can learn other things while I am patient with a new acquisition(took me 30 years to reacquire a Citation 12 amp for my setup).

Again, Thanks.
The pics are Gunney Russ with Flat Alexis who is on a journey to WV for a show and tell at her school. She is the daughter of a Canadian friend of long standing. The second is a time exposure at night of a local friend's place. Both were taken with a Minolta D'Image(not a bad assortment of options for a snapshot camera, but nothing like the D200).
 

Attachments

  • 2011-04-21_10-34-08.jpg
    2011-04-21_10-34-08.jpg
    79.1 KB · Views: 9
  • 2017-12-14_11-45-15.jpg
    2017-12-14_11-45-15.jpg
    37.2 KB · Views: 10
Last edited:
Absolutely love my 55mm f3.5. I also have a 2.8 manual focus which is great but I slightly prefer the mechanics of the 3.5. Probably the best value lens I've ever purchased.

You can also get the tube to get to 1:1 though lighting often becomes an issue.

Great lens that you can use forever.

The 100 2.8E is a great, lightweight lens in that range which can sometimes be bought for chump change.

The various Tamron 90mm 2.8 macros are great for autofocus, if a bit long.

Tamron's 17-50 and 28-75 2.8 zooms are great if you get a good used copy. Just be sure to buy from a source with a great return policy.
 
Last edited:
I lucked out on the bellows and won it for @$120 including the shipping. Google Nikon Bellows and you'll find all kinds of info. Mine is a PB-5 & PS-5 bellows and slide copy attachment respectively. Came with boxes and instructions too which helped me spend more money on the reversing rings needed to turn the lenses around. They were not what I call inexpensive as they cost as much as some of my adapters.
I started with a 55 3.5 but ended up giving it to my brother in a trade. The 2.8 is really nice. I consider it one of my best lenses.
Nice F Mark. For some reason I have this insane desire to purchase a mechanical Nikon (FM2, F2AS or such), and each time I find one I have to remind myself I don't shoot film so why would I need it.
 
If you want one nice all around, prime (fixed focal length) for inexpensive, try the Nikon 35mm f1.8g. Can be used manual or auto, and can be had cheap used. I got mine from a reputable online dealer for about $125, it was a demo model, but good as new.

Large aperture helps with low light photography, or getting nice shots with small depth of field for blurry backgrounds (bokeh).

For a nice all around useful zoom, I have the Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 as my general carry lens.
 
Last edited:
I'm a little late to the party here, but I'm another vote for the 35mm 1.8 DX. 55mm is very long for a walking around lens, especially for a DX camera. As far as manual focus - I have found it to be virtually impossible to manually focus accurately with my Nikon D5500. Maybe the D200 has better aids for MF but to be honest I doubt it.

tincat2 said:
Edit: Oh, yes, what's a good source for the older Nikon stuff you mention? One of my mantras is that, for the most part, "older is better".
Click to expand...

That is basically the mission statement for many folks on AK, but it's definitely not true when it comes to digital cameras. The bottom of the line Nikon D3400 will give much better performance than your D200, and can operate the cheap (but quite good) AF-P lenses. If you find yourself really liking DSLR photography you may want to consider upgrading to something like it.
 
Did I mention my son's photoblog?
He's a Nikon glass nut; he has many, many posts devoted to more or less obscure, mostly wonderful, and sometimes cheap Nikkor glass :)

http://icouldbeahero.blogspot.com

Here're a few randomly chosen examples:

http://icouldbeahero.blogspot.com/2018/05/nikkor-35mm-f28-ai.html
http://icouldbeahero.blogspot.com/2018/01/nikon-af-s-micro-nikkor-60mm-f28-g-ed.html
http://icouldbeahero.blogspot.com/2018/01/nikkor-af-85mm-f18d-if.html
http://icouldbeahero.blogspot.com/2018/02/nikkor-35mm-f2-o.html
http://icouldbeahero.blogspot.com/2018/03/nikkor-24mm-f2-ai.html
http://icouldbeahero.blogspot.com/2018/03/nikkor-100mm-f28-series-e.html

Virtually all "F" mount Nikon glass will work on modern Nikon DSLRs, albeit without (in many cases) auto focus or auto-exposure. Still, there's an embarrassment of riches of excellent Nikon glass out there, old and new.

ailenses3.jpg

DSC_5114s.jpg

DSC_0421.JPG


Portrait of the mathematician as a photographer :)

14740003s.jpg
 
You mentioned mountain scenery and wildlife in your previous posts.
I'm going to recommend a wide angle 12-24mm for those scenery shots and you can get a lot done with this lens. The wide angle can always tell a story.
For the wildlife captures, you're going to need something with a bit of reach because when you go into crop, it's gonna get grainy. The 70-200 with a teleconverter would be practical and that would include some portraiture coverage if needed. Like others have mentioned the 55mm is good but the 17-55 is better, especially on a 1.5x crop, a great workhorse lens. YMMV

Happy shooting!
 
12-24 lenses tend to be expensive. The new (and good) Nikon AF-P 10-20mm zoom is reasonably priced, but it only works on newer camera bodies. It is a "fly by wire" type lens with no mechanical connection between the focus ring and the focus system, and it won't focus at all on the older bodies.

For telephoto wildlife there is the 70-300 AF-P VR, which has great VR and auto focuses faster than even the professional zoom lenses. But again you need a recent body to work it.
 
Realize the OP mentioned 'new', 'performance' and 'value'. I think the lenses I mentioned might be expensive but I would purchase them used if I could find them in decent refurb'ed or Excellent+ condition.

On the back end if the OP decides to sell them, the money and value would still be there for upgrading, etc.
 
He would still be putting them on a 13 year old body, which is the weak link in the chain. You would be far better off with a 70-300 AF-P on a D3400 (total cost under $600) than using a D200 with a 70-200 2.8 and a TC (total cost much more).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom