Spend what little money I have (lenses)

[Natedawg]

Okay, I'm thinking of taking the plunge and buying a D60. I would consider myself an ametuer and I'm not really certain as to what lense(s) I should buy.

I shoot (or plan to at least) mostly landscape and nature photography. I'm almost always shooting outside.
So far, Im thinking of getting two lenses. One to start me off and then another when I get more money (stupid college and all). I was looking at two zoom lenses. I definatley want a large telephoto lens. Something around say 300mm.
PRICE IS THE BIGGEST CONCERN BY FAR. I want to stick to a budget of around 300-400 for BOTH. Does this sound reasonable?

I have my eyes on these two so far:
Canon EF 28-90 USM
Canon EF 75-300 USM

Not sure if that's their exact names, but its close. Bottom line is they are inexpensive.
Since I'm just getting into this horribly expensive hobby, I'm not all that concerned with having the best lens around...yet.

With all of this in mind, should I be looking at some other lenses? Will I want a wider angle lens since the D60 has a multiplier of 1.6? Should I really spend 2000 bucks for this damn camera? :)
Thanks

[miro]

Yes, you should spend $200 for the camera and you won't be sorry :)

Lens-wise, lens I bought with the camera is 28-135 IS, but on 28x1.6=44.8, which is way too much for landscapes, weddings etc (for my taste). So I got sigma 15-30 Aspherical. 15x1.6=24 and tha'ts very decent and that's very good lens too.

Hope this helps,

-Miro

[Natedawg]

Ah, so you think I will want a wider angle lens?
The only thing I've found in a reasonable price range is some Canon EF 22-55 4/5.6
Think that might be a better choice?

[Roger_Cavanagh]

Coming from the UK, I can't comment on lens prices (we get ripped off big time), but with a limited budget you might like to consider primes lenses - new or second-hand.

I used to own the 75-300IS, and the image quality was really crappy on the D30, I can't imagine it will be any better on the D60.

You get better quality with primes than cheap zooms, may not be so flexible, but it will make you think more when you are taking pictures.

Regards,

[Natedawg]

that's fairly ironic considering the only two lenses I have ever had are primes. Any ccepestions?

[Roger_Cavanagh]

Have a look at this thread:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/viewtopic.php?TopicID=9489

Fred's post gives several choices, but there is no option suggested at 300. I'm not sure what to suggest here that wouldn't blow your budget.

Regards,

[Natedawg]

Interesting....
I was actually just re-thinking about maybe just sticking with two primes for now and then getting a nice 300mm later on. I can just see the cash flying out the window!

Anyway, that EF 20 is pretty expensive...think it would be wise to just shell out the money for it or go for the EF 24 that costs about a hundred less?

I figure I can throw in the EF 50 too with either one of those and still be fairly in my budget range...granted I would have no telephoto, but I might win the lotto someday (just gotta buy those tickets).

I kinda used to being limited with prime lenses (my main lens is a 50mm) so I have no real problem going with primes. Can always crop afterall. :)