I shoot all my photos almost exclusively with my Nikon D60. I also have a little Nikon Cool Pix that I use occasionally. The quality is good with the point-n-shoot, but I love my DSLR camera.
When I got O’Dell (that’s what call Him), a 18-55mm lens was included and I shot only with that for months. Since then I have added three more lenses to my arsenal:
- 55-200mm zoom
- 50mm f/1.8 prime
- 20mm f/2.8 macro/wide-angle
I use all of these, each for different reasons.
The zoom I use for a lot of my close-up shots, but with my new 20mm, I’m experimenting with it. As a wide-angle, I can get in close, but include more image in the shot. The zoom is great for wildlife shots too. I can capture a skittish bird or potentially hungry alligator without having to get so close I give myself away.
If I want really sharp photos, I use the 50mm. Other photographers also swear by this lens for portrait work for the image quality.
The only drawbacks to each of my fixed length lenses, it that there is no auto-focus. I have terrible vision, so manually focusing can sometimes be a problem. But, with my instant replay, I can zoom in the image to check focus, and try again if needed.
I wanted to show the difference in lenses here. Using two different subjects, I took a photo with each lens. I set the camera on Priority and shot from the same location. Each image is Straight out of Camera. The only editing was to resize.
The first shot is a landscape: (I captioned each with the focal length and lens used)
The second shot is a close up: (same subject, same settings)
Because each focal length is different, especially with the fixed lenses, I moved toward the subject until I was as close as I could be and still get the image in focus. With the 20mm lens, I was probably less than a foot away, with the 200mm, I was at least three feet away.
*resizing and collage created with Picnik.com