Lens for portraits, sport and landscapes

carvel

Hi, I'd like to get a lens for my D3100 (I already have a 18-55mm kit lens) that I can use for taking portraits with a blurred background as well as using it when I'm at kids sporting events and when I want to take landscapes. I don't like to have to change the lenses apart from having the load to carry.

Is it best to get a separate lens for different situations - maybe a 50mm and 70-200/300mm for sporting events and landscapes, or get one lens I can use in all situations?

What are the pros and cons of owning 2 more lenses versus a telephoto lens (70-200/300mm)? Which lens ( please include the specs) is cheaper, maybe lighter but not at the cost of quality? I just get so overwhelmed at the huge variety of lenses available, and I don't know which is best suitable for me.

I appreciate all advice as I'm fairly new to DSLR's and lenses.

ohyeahar

The lens you’re looking for is probably the AF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF VR DX II. It covers a huge focal range in a single package.

For best image quality, sure, it’s best to have dedicated lenses for certain scenarios. E.g., use a 70-200mm f/2.8 for sports, 85mm f/1.8 for portraits, 50mm f/1.8 for street photography, and a wide-angle prime or zoom for landscapes.

If you’re reluctant to carry around so much gear or don’t like to switch lenses, then it’s all moot. Your gear must fit in to your needs.

People have their own preferences. There’s no one absolutely right way when it comes to lens choice. A lens’s versatility and performance often have an inverse relationship. In general, the more versatile it is, the less performance you get out of it. The less versatile it is, the more performance you get out of it. So you need to balance out your needs.