Getting a wide angle lens vs telephoto for Nikon?

I'm not too sure whether should I get a 10-24mm or a 70-300mm lens. I know it boils down to the question whether do I like to take landscape or wildlife photography.

I was wondering, if I'm short of budget, and could only pick one, which one should I pick first? (I will eventually get both one day)

The 10-24mm lens costs USD 350 whereas the 70-300mm lens costs around USD 150?

I'm looking into the 10-24 mm ones, but is it that worth it to get the more expensive lens compared to the 70-300mm lens? Both are used lens, but rarely used (because the shutter count of the seller's dslr is less than 3k)

What sort of wildlife? For most animals you need more than 300mm unless you are close to them. If it's wild birds then you need double that to get a decent picture otherwise the bird will be too small in the photo.

The $150 70-300mm is junk. The $400 55-300mm AF-S VR DX is not bad, but a really good 70-300mm AF-S VR is about $590.
Between having wider than 18mm or longer than 55mm, I find the latter more useful. I think super wide is rarely useful for landscapes, but it can be useful for interiors. Telephoto can give compressed perspectives.


Wide angle is fine for filling up with foreground objects but shrinking backgrounds.


To make good use of a telephoto requires a tripod. Actually to make good use of any focal length, especially with the new 24MP sensors requires a tripod.

If you are short on budget, get a flash instead.

For me 70 to 300 would suit landscape anmd wildlife, since I lkie to take that sort of landscape photo. But if you are even talking wide-angle for landscape you like different sorts of landscape photos from me.

Always get the most expensive lens you can afford.
They worth the money and will not disappoint you.
So in your case, the 10-24mm should be the first one before the telephoto.
With wide angle lens, you are going to have fun. You will mount it on and start shooting photos many times, because of the amount of space you can capture. When you put your eye in that viewfinder, you will be like "WOW! "
You can trust me.

All these answers say that you need the most expensive lens to get amazing shots. True to a certain extent because the better glass elements will cost more. However at the end of the day, you can have all the equipment in the world and still shoot terrible pictures. Unless, you're clearly a National Geographic photographer like One wee here. You don't need £500 lenses to take amazing shots. Look on ebay for a decent telephoto lens (say 70-300mm is good for landscapes and wildlife) (sigma, tamron etc are all good manufacturers). It's more about developing your personal photographic skill. Learn your camera. Look for scenes (leading lines, patterns, detail, composition etc) . Any skilled photographer can get at least get a decent shot out of less than decent equipment from pure skill (good composition and good ideas).