Bayou

I'm afraid you have crop factor confusion. The same coverage would be a 24-120 lens. Nikon's DX lenses show true focal length, just as do their FX lenses.

flasfill Loc: Sandy Springs GA

I had a problem with my older 24-120. I sent it to Nikon. They told me they could not repair it so they gave me a great deal on a refurbished one. It’s my go to daily lens. I’d go to nikon’s website and see I’d that have any refurbished available and just buy it.

V2volk Loc: St. Louis area

perhaps she can find a refurbished 24-120 F4 that fits budget

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Some general recommendations for that series of camera -
https://www.camerastuffreview.com/en/general/best-lens-for-nikon-d3300
https://www.switchbacktravel.com/best-lenses-nikon-d3300
https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/the-first-nikon-lenses-you-should-buy/
http://lensespro.org/best-lenses-for-nikon-d3300/
http://www.smashingcamera.com/2014/03/6-best-lenses-for-nikon-d3300/

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Even with the 70-300 there’s still an advantage to some overlap. When I shot primarily DX the 18-200 was my go to lens because it covered 98% of my shots. It’s nice having that 70-300 but it’s also nice to not have to change lenses very often.

ELNikkor

An 18-140 DX falls into that sweet-spot of affordability, weight, speed, and sharpness that make it a great "95% of all photos" lens.

fourlocks Loc: Londonderry, NH

These are good suggestions. I have several lenses but my 18-200mm covers 95% of the situations I'm shooting. Have your wife first check each one on her camera. I purchased a D5500 because it's compact and lightweight but it almost triples in size and weight with the 18-200mm on it. Glass is heavy and it could be an issue.

Leon S Loc: Minnesota

I like the 24-85 vr very much. It works for both dx and fx cameras. Its about the same weight as the 24-120 vr your wife shot.. I use it on my D700 and D810. My wife shoots an D800 with the 24-70 2.8 vr. As long as we shoot at F4.5 and above, the lenses perform the same. If you ever go to the fx cameras, you will appreciate having fx lenses.

sxrich

Lots of good choices mentioned already. Personally, and I have this lens on a d7100 crop, Nikon 17-55mm 2.8 dx (Made in Japan). It's Nikon's most expensive ($1,500 usd) and well built dx crop lens. Yet, you can find them used, in great condition for around $500 give or take. It's heavy, very sharp, metal and the constant 2.8 might be a real plus. However, if you only shoot in great light or don't need a pro level build quality/speed etc, some of the other suggestions will work. The 17-55 2.8 has similar build quality to the Nikon 24-70 2.8 FF lens, which I also have. Here's a few pics taken with the lens on a d7100

(Download)


(Download)

whatdat Loc: Del Valle, Tx.

Any good for macro work?

Real Nikon Lover Loc: Simi Valley, CA

I had a 18-200 and used it exclusively on my D200 and D300 until going full frame. I sold it to a friend 5 years ago and he is still using it with great success. It was a great lens for my purposes.

When I went full frame (D810 and D850) I bought a 28-300 as a "go to" lens for general shooting. Even though pricey I called them my "throw away glass" because they were a helluva lot cheaper than the rest of the glass I own.

Good used glass at KEH and MPB. Also found some fair pricing on used at Adorama, B&H and Samy's Camera.

reverendray

This link is a good place to start her looking

https://www.dxomark.com/nikon-d3400-best-zoom-lenses-review/

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I am aware that there is variability among lenses, just as there are differences among photographers in terms of what they consider as acceptable performance. And I know that there are folks who like the 18-70mm DX zoom. But I do not consider a lens that has perceptibly loose construction, a lens that is typically significantly sharper on one side of the image then on the other (not related to focus), and a lens that just never will quite focus properly to be a very good lens. The 18-70 was my first lens when I switched to digital photography, and it did not provide anywhere close to acceptable performance on the Fuji S3Pro (6 MP) or D200 (10 MP). I shudder to think how it would do on a 21 or 24 MP camera. I replaced it very quickly with the 17-55mm f/2.8 Zoom, which I still use today. It would be different if I were a devoted pixel peeper or otherwise had astronomically high expectations of lens performance, but compared to many here, I am pretty flexible around lenses. After all, I like the 24-120 mm f/4 zoom. I cannot think of anyone in my photography circle who still shoots with this lens.

It is possible that there are better copies of the lens than the one I had. I would just shop very carefully for it if I had to have one. And don't overpay. Remember that it cost only about $350 when new. KEH has one for less than $70 now.

tdozier3 Loc: Northern Illinois

The Sigma 18-300 Contemporary is a fantastic do it all lens. I bought one for my D3200 and now use it on my D7500. I paid $399 new for mine when they first came out, but I beleive they are a bit more now. Unless you're dead set on Nikon glass, it is a great alternative

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)