MiroFoto

I am asking UHH community to help again. In fact I am not a big photographer but I would like to take some nice pictures (!without changing lenses!). Today I am deciding the purchase of 18-300 mm lens. There is an original lens 77 mm glass for $1000 and a second generation 18-300 with 67 mm size. It is the same filter size as a set lens 18-140 , I have.
The second one is $100 less and VR II improved , it also is lighter (great feature for me). It is 1/2 stop slower...will it make a significant difference?
I have 2 questions .....Is the 77mm better to prevent vignetting and is the glass quality better? Is the VR so much better? So why is the newer lens cheaper?

If you give me direction (maybe previous discussion- thread on UHH) , advice or any help I will appreciate it very much.

Miro

photon56 Loc: North America

I looked at the super zooms from Nikon and ended up getting the Tamron 16-300mm Macro lens. It's about the same size lens as the Nikkor 18-140mm for $630.

MiroFoto

Thank you for the hint. I have checked the DXOMArk, but no info on Nikkon. I am a little hesitant - if the Tamron or Sigma work perfect w Nikon camera - I do not want to tease later UHH do the ground . I have already asked too many question and do not have too much to contribute.

Miro

PhotoPhred Loc: Cheyney, Pa

I just purchased a Sigma 18-250 macro for my wives d5100, she hates changing lenses, and it works great. Built like a tank and sharp through the whole range. I had the older version Nikon 18-300 and it was a little heavy for her. The Sigma was $349.00. It doesn't interfere with the pop-up flash. It's worth checking out.

traveler90712 Loc: Lake Worth, Fl.

Asking questions in a very good way to learn. There are no stupid questions!!!

Mr PC Loc: Austin, TX

I have the Sigma 18-250 and really like it, but I do have my eye on either the newer Nikon 18-300 or the Tamron 16-300 as my next upgrade. It's a little soft zoomed all the way and not quite as quick as my Nikon 55-300, but it's a great walking around lens for only $350.

djenrette Loc: Philadelphia

[quote=MiroFoto]I am asking UHH community to help again. In fact I am not a big photographer but I would like to take some nice pictures (!without changing lenses!). Today I am deciding the purchase of 18-300 mm lens. There is an original lens 77 mm glass for $1000 and a second generation 18-300 with 67 mm size. It is the same filter size as a set lens 18-140 , I have.
The second one is $100 less and VR II improved , it also is lighter (great feature for me). It is 1/2 stop slower...will it make a significant difference?
I have 2 questions .....Is the 77mm better to prevent vignetting and is the glass quality better? Is the VR so much better? So why is the newer lens cheaper?

First, is f/6.3 a half stop slower? I believe it is more like 1/3 stop slower and easily within the focusing range of the newer Nikons. Second, I have this lens --along with other current Nikkors-- and this one is terrific and makes most of my other lenses sit on the shelf. I have not read the other comments on this issue yet, but, BUT -- for sunny day photography and prints up to 16x20, which would you rather carry around all day: A D800 with 24-70/2.8 and a 70-200/2.8 and a 300/4 OR a D7100 with the 18-300/3.5-6.3? I believe a photographer could make a living with just this one lens. But let me look down the comments and see what others have said ...

naturepics43 Loc: Hocking Co. Ohio - USA

We all started at some point. Ask all the questions you want. In the years to come, you can help & contribute.

khsolomon Loc: Canyon Lake, CA

There was an earlier thread "Nikon 18 - 300 lens" that discusses both lenses. Check out:
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-229584-1.html
I use the 67mm newer version of the 18-300mm lens you are considering and like it very much. Here's my post to that earlier thread, with a couple of example photos:
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-229584-4.html#3871286
Good luck.

MiroFoto

Thank you all on all the threads - yes, a lot of info.
In conclusion, I see the new Nikon 18-300 67 filter is probably better than the previous one...good news.
A new headache = what about Tamron 16-300 then? => lighter, cheaper , 16mm vs 18 AND did I understand that you can use 1.4 0r 2x convertor? I mean both :1. fit it on the lens 2. can you auto zoom and isn't it too much zooming (The 7100 has the 1.3 crop already)

Miro

MiroFoto

One more issue -How come, my posts do not show at the UHH opening screen of the day?

Thanks.

amehta Loc: Boston

Yes, f/6.3 is 1/3 stop slower: f/5.6, f/6.3, f/7.1, f/8. I agree that newer Nikon DSLRs should be able to AF with an f/6.3 lens.

Definitely the D800. :-)

MiroFoto

Thank you

still I am waiting for more info about Tamron.
This will be my only lens and the last one so I have to be careful. I like the range but I was concerned about 67mm vignetting . Eventually the price between 500-1000 is not the issue, but I would like to have decent one for D7100.
Can somebody please contribute some more wisdom

Miro

jimpitt

I recently purchased the newer version of the Nikkor 18-300 DX. It is 3/4 lb lighter and a full inch shorter than the older 18-300. Both are VR which is important to me. I decided I did not wish to keep changing lenses for a variety of shooting, so a diverse zoom was my choice. The lighter weight allows for keeping it on the camera at all times and for travel I therefore do not take my gadget case. My option was to get the older 18-300 for serious stuff and pair with the newer 18-55 VR for just travel which I believe is the smallest and lightest zoom Nikkor makes. Because I also have a Leica 15 pix "shirtpocket" (for dinner parties) as well as the Olympus "rough use" (for the beach, sailing, and sky diving), my final decision was for the newer 18-300 was the right way to go. After one week and about 350 images, I am extremely pleased. Some more professional photographers than I may not mind changing lenses frequently, so my decision may not be the way to go for everyone. By the way, I use it with a D 5300.

MiroFoto

Thank you for your info. I have the same position....however, maybe someone can compare this Nikon 18-300 with Tamron 16-300. I am kind of running out of time due to vacation trip.

Thanks Miro