A good lens first or a flash first?

I'm getting a Nikon D5300 with a 18-140mm 3.5-5.6 lens. I got a bag, card and tripod already. I want to get a 35mm 1.8g lens and a bounce flash. I can only get one for now but I will eventually get the other but it will have to wait 1-2 years. What should I get first and why?

Why not get the D5300 with the 35mm outright and maybe you can squeeze a flash in there if not sooner than you planned?

I would suggest a lens first because the flash is pointless without it and is less useful than a good lens.

I disagree. Do you want to photograph the kids and the dog running around inside and freeze the motion nice and sharp? Do you think an f1.8 lens will do it for you? It won't. Invest in a GOOD flash.

No don't substitute a 35mm for a 18-140mm. Get the kit and you are getting a $600 lens for $400, and it will give you enough of a range of focal lengths to make you the coveting of other focal lengths very infrequent.

If you are looking at a wireless flash as you indicated in your other post, do not get the D5300. As an entry level DSLR, the D5300 lacks the internal wireless control circuitry.

Consider the D7100 or D7000 as both of those cameras do have built in wireless flash control.

If you want to control a Nikon flash wirelessly, the D5300 requires the optional SU800, which is over $200. And when you add the cost of the SU800 to the D5300, you can actually buy the D7000 for less money, and the D7100 for only a few dollars more.

The D5300 is not the least expensive solution when you start to add extras.

And since the D7100 includes an in-camera focus motor that the D5300 does not (another entry level camera issue), then you can buy less expensive AF lenses. For example, the Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.8 is over $200, and both D5300 and D7100 can use it.

However, with the D7100, you can buy the same quality Nikon AF 50mm f/1.8 for $100 less, and all functions of the lens will work - including autofocus.

You can't however use the AF 50mm f/1.8 lens on the D5300 as it will not autofocus this lens… Well, you can use this lens with the D5300, but the lens will not autofocus.

D7000 with 18-105mm lens ($999): http://www.amazon.com/...0042X9LCO/

D7100 with 18-140mm lens ($1,400): http://www.amazon.com/...00F5E3N46/

D5300 with 18-140mm lens ($1,050): http://www.amazon.com/...00FY3T3TM/

SU800 ($220) flash control required with the D5300: http://www.amazon.com/...000CRLBN6/

So when you add the D5300 and SU800, the total cost is $1,270, meaning the D7000 is far less expensive, and the D7100 is only $130 more… Seems the D7000 or D7100 is more cost effective once you consider you can also use AF lenses.

And when it comes time for you to go with a wireless flash unit, all you need to buy is an iTTL/Wireless flash unit, such as the Nikon SB700.

Personally I would wait for a few weeks. Get used to the kit you are already buying and see what you think of the built in flash before splashing out. You might find that there's something else that you would prefer, such as a 40mm micro lens or a tripod for example. The 40mm micro is a sharp f2.8 prime lens, so most of the advantages of the 35mm f1.8, but with much better close up facilities. Alternatively some good software such as Lightroom might be a better investment.

The problem is I know several people who have splashed out on expensive flashes and then hardly used them. The D5300 is capable of very good high-ISO pictures so you may find that you just don't actually need one. Also, flash is not always the most flattering of lighting. A relatively cheap reflector might be a better solution for some shots in daytime light.