SteveR Loc: Michigan

I don't know if this makes a difference, but B&H has two used ones for sale for $729 and $749 rated at 9 stars.

kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA

Thanks, but not really interested. My D7100 is already more camera I’ll ever need. I mean, you never know. But at present, I have no plans to go full frame.

Tommy II Loc: Northern Illinois

The Tamron 16-300 is a nice lens. I bought one last month. And it's been in my Nikon D7000 since. I kept my Nikon 50mm f/1.4and 35mm f/1.8, and sold my other Nikon lenses. I'm not a Pro, but to my eye, it takes beautiful, clear pictures. I bought it from B&H for $549.00, but Adorama and Cameta have it for the same price. If you're not s Pro, and you want to quit buying all these lenses, grab one. You'll really like it. Filters are 67mm.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

It was nice of you to bring your daughter with you.

Bultaco Loc: Aiken, SC

The Nikor f5.6 is my walk around lens on my D7100 shooting wildlife. I've used DX lens but found the FF to be a little sharper IMHO.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Full frame lenses work just fine on dx cameras. One advantage is that the center portion of the lens is used eliminating any chromatic aberration from the edges. The 28-300 is a very popular lens on dx cameras among UHH members....and even on 800 series cameras (I use it on mine on vacation and for other purposes). If the D7100 seems like a lot of camera, it needs a good lens to go with it. Believe me, you would be very happy with a 28-300mm. I would suggest trying to find a way to rent or borrow one to check it out. Check with B&H to see if they have a 30 day return policy no questions asked, like Arlington Camera does, as well. Ask rmalarz...he'll tell you as well that this is an excellent lens. I don't want to seem like I'm twisting your arm, but you've got a great camera. You should get a great lens to go with it.

StanRP Loc: Ontario Canada

Hi,

I looked at both the f5.6 and f6.3. I chose the f6.3 because it had good performance reports and was physically smaller and lighter. I was not concerned about the depth-of-field difference - or the need for slower shutter speed or higher ISO at f5.6. In addition, the f6.3 has the better VRII stabilization. Here is one report comparing them:

https://www.camerastuffreview.com/nikon-lens-review/nikon-18-300mm-vr-vs-nikon-18-300mm-vr-ii

Personally, using a Nikon camera, I keep to Nikon lens because software in the camera corrects the lens at the settings used and this is applied directly 'in-camera' to the JPEG files. Of course, the info from Nikon or any other quality lens is added to the RAW.

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

kb6kgx the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS EX HSM is the only Sigma optic in my Nikon DX kit... It is Pro Level glass and Nikon actually brought legal action against Sigma during the period this was rolled out for infringement on their VR design... enough said...

Nikon refuses to provide Pro level glass for the DX mount... thus this Sigma is to be cherished... As is the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 (again Pro level glass).

As for the 18-300mm (both versions) save your money and pick up the new Pulse Stepper Focus Motor AF-P 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3E ED VR optic... It totally blows both of these older "Super Zooms" out of the water... I'm selling mine before their worth plummets.

Don't take my word here... Everyone who uses this new Pulse Stepper Motor variant is amazed at the acuity and focus speed...
I shot a soccer match with it last week and it focuses faster than my 200-500mm f/5.6 nearly as fast as the ionic AF-S 70-200 f/2.8 and the acuity is superb! This lens is a major game changer for Nikon who is obviously going after the lucrative video market since this lens is virtually silent...

Unbelievable since the price point on a White Box is $208 and for a 5 year Nikon Warranty variant it's only $395... The 18-300mm variants are simply an unwise choice at this juncture... they are way worse in acuity and focus speed and way too heavy... Nikon has put a shot across Canon's bow with their new Pulse Stepper Motor optic... and are serious about video now...

Hope this helps and enjoy that superb Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 OS EX HSM I totally LOVE mine!
But please remember to turn off the OS before mounting the lens and before removing it... You'll understand why if you ignore Sigma's guidance here...

jaycoffman Loc: San Diego

OK things often go a bit afield here but everyone loves photography and talking about it. One constant here that I think is important is, "What do you want from your pictures?" If you're looking for huge prints or magazine covers then more money and more specific lenses will probably be the way to go. If not, then think what you want and what you can carry.

Responding to just one part of your question, I've been using the Tamron 16-300 on my d7100 for over three years now as my walk-around lens and have had it in many parts of the world under many conditions (rain forest, mountains, water, cities etc. as well as animals, people closeups, and scenery). I typically take 1000 to 5000 shots per trip. I get a lot of good shots with my Tamron--good enough to publish in my email stories of my trips (this is not a professional thing--it's just for friends) and I am very happy with the results. I'm sure if you quibble or if you must be sure that every shot is as close to a keeper as possible you could do better but as I've described my usage the Tamron does a really good job and I'm not looking to change. That's probably how I'd recommend considering your situation.

scott42946 Loc: Alabama

I waivered on this myself but finally went with the 5.6, partially because it is a newer model and I'm ever hopeful that it means improvements crept in. Additionally, I read several reviews/comparisons that said it indeed outperformed the 6.3. Overall, I'm very happy with my purchase, and the 18-300 f5.6 is my day-to-day 'go-to' lens.

Filter size really doesn't have a direct bearing on quality. In essence the filter size is as big as it needs to be to span the glass...BUT the expanse of glass is a factor of the quality of the lens, maximum f/stop, and the lens size. For example, a long (e..g. 500mm) lens with a large f/stop (e.g. f4) results in a BIG set of glass, a lot of weight, and $$$. On the other hand a 500mm lens with very few elements and a f8 max aperture will likely be very inexpensive, have a modest filter size, and probably won't take as sharp pictures as the one previously described.

You need to do what works for YOU. Good luck--and good shooting! Let the forum know how it turns out. We can all learn from each other's successes--and even some of the "dagnabits!@!"

wicook Loc: Alberta, Canada

I recently bought a D7200 with the 18-300 f3.5-6.3 and am very pleased with it. The D7200 menus allow you to correct for lens distortion in-camera, so you don't have to do that in PP. I find that the combo works well even in relatively low light.

kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA

Does the D7100 have this, as well? That's what I have.

kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA

Just want to clarify. I believe that the 5.6 is the older one and the 6.3 is the newer one.

Kfallsfotoman

I've rented both the Tamron 16-300 & the 18-300.
I prefer the Nikon - picture quality wise very close. The Nikon felt better - sturdy and quieter.

But if I was in a crunch and only could afford the Tamron I would go for it!

If you're traveling - and that is main reason for the lens - having one lens that covers this range would make life a lot easier.

Another point - especially if traveling - is size and weight. From a handling standpoint I seem to recall the Tamron was smaller and lighter than the nikon.

StanRP Loc: Ontario Canada

Correct:

The 18-300 f/5.6 was released June 2012

The 18-300 f/6.3 was released April 2014

The f/5.6 has VR - the f/6.3 has VRII


StanRP