Nikon 18-105 vs 18-140
Nov 30, 2021 12:20:31 #
I've had them all at different times over the years. Most time spent with the early 18-200 on a D90. Roughly 90% of many thousands of shots were at less than 100mm, maybe 1 - 2% at 200mm. Yes the lens crept but it wasn't a problem. I used to keep a rubber band strategically placed on the barrel. A later model 18-200 on a D5300 had a lens lock but would only lock at 18mm. It however didn't creep and I rarely locked the lens. 18-105mm on the D5300, the "kit" lens I bought it with, was not a good lens for me so didn't last long. I traded it on an 18-140mm which was quite nice - took many great shots with it but always felt I missed the extra reach of the 18-200. My daughter bought a 18-300mm for her D3400 and achieved great results with it - very impressed with it I was and buying a D5500 to replace the D5300, which went to my son who still uses it, I lashed out and bought the 18-300. Haven't regretted it at all - its still on the D5500 and will remain so for my few remaining years.
Nov 30, 2021 12:33:52 #
Warhorse
Loc: SE Michigan
I have the 18-105mm mainly because I got a very good price on it used a few years ago. I think it works well enough for my needs on my D5600 as a "walk around lens". I like my 18-300mm lens on my D500 for similar purposes. I am not a professional photographer.
Nov 30, 2021 12:39:26 #
Please, everyone, remember that the topic of this thread was not which is the better lens. it's obvious that people have had different experiences with the various lenses. The question was whether it is worth selling the 105 and getting a 140. If we are talking a new 140, I would say not. Used, say from mpb.com for about $180-200, maybe. And perhaps mpb would offer a decent price as a trade-in. However, based on previous experiences with trade-ins, I would get the 140 and check it out before I just sold, not traded, the 105.
I still think a 10-20mm for $300 would be a better option for a trip where landscapes are a big part of the reason for taking a camera in the first place.
I still think a 10-20mm for $300 would be a better option for a trip where landscapes are a big part of the reason for taking a camera in the first place.
Nov 30, 2021 13:03:48 #
Thank you all for your input on this. I believe there is a local photo shop that I can rent the lens from. I will do that and compare to see if it is worth pursuing further. I have multiple lenses that cover the range from 18 all the way to 500. But do to the busy schedule the travel agent has put together, trying to limit any lens changes and carrying extra equipment.
Again I appreciate everyone's input on this conversation.
Thank you.
Again I appreciate everyone's input on this conversation.
Thank you.
Nov 30, 2021 13:43:47 #
mwsilvers
Loc: Central New Jersey
ClarkJohnson wrote:
As you know, Nikon offers a variety of 18-xxx options for DX bodies. I have owned and tried them all. The 18-140 seems to be the sweet spot in the line-up for IQ, versatility and handling. I now use it (with FTZ) on my Z50. It is not imperative that you switch to this lens for your trip, but you might consider it when thinking about your long-term needs.
Just in case you are not aware, Nikon has a brand new Z DX 18-140mm VR lens made specifically for your Z50 and the Z fc. No FTZ needed. It is very compact and only weighs 11 oz.
Nov 30, 2021 14:21:08 #
I have used both the 18-140 and the 18-200 and found that there was not a lot of difference in the image quality as regards sharpness. I settled on the 18-200 only for the exta reach as all other factors to me were identical. The 200 is a little heavier than the 140 which may be a concern if you do a lot of walking while in Ireland which I hear is a given. You will be satisfied with either but be sure you fit your choice with a UV filter, travel can be rough on cameras at times.
Nov 30, 2021 14:42:08 #
It is interesting that some people have had good 18-105s, other not. The same with the 18-200. But so far, nobody seems to have had a bad 18-140.
mpb.com has several of the 18-140 lenses in "Excellent: condition for $149. They currently don't have any "Like New". That seems like a good deal, although I personally would wait for a Like New lens to show up. Tha is actually what I did buy, and it would likely be only $20-30 more. But I would call them to make sure the mens I was getting was made in Thailand.
mpb.com has several of the 18-140 lenses in "Excellent: condition for $149. They currently don't have any "Like New". That seems like a good deal, although I personally would wait for a Like New lens to show up. Tha is actually what I did buy, and it would likely be only $20-30 more. But I would call them to make sure the mens I was getting was made in Thailand.
Nov 30, 2021 15:21:35 #
A rubber band is a quick fix for lens creep. I use an 18-200 almost exclusively on a 7100 and am very happy with it.
Nov 30, 2021 16:01:15 #
I also have the newer version of the 18-200 and have never had an issue with creep. It has been my primary walk-around on my D7200 some years. Much lighter than the 18-300.
Nov 30, 2021 19:11:53 #
NikonRocks
Loc: Sydney
Just another angle on this topic - have you thought about buying/hiring a teleconverter to use with your existing lens?
Nov 30, 2021 20:17:00 #
smussler
Loc: Land O Lakes, FL - Formerly Miller Place, NY
Check this out. Lets you compare those two lenses.
https://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/simulator/
I have the 18-140. It's on my camera most of the time.
https://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/simulator/
I have the 18-140. It's on my camera most of the time.
Nov 30, 2021 20:33:21 #
stanikon wrote:
If the financial considerations are moot, then look at it this way: you can always use the 18-140 to achieve a focal length of 105 but there is no way you can zoom to 140 with the 18-105.
Nov 30, 2021 21:25:19 #
I owned the 18 - 140 but wanted more reach for wildlife, so I recently purchased a refurb 18 - 300. IMO both lenses are about equally sharp. The 18 - 300 is somewhat larger and heavier, so I often make do with the smaller lens to reduce size and weight. I have not had the lens creep issue; I use the 18mm lock designed into the 18 - 300 lens. When I do use the 18 - 140, I do sometimes miss the 300 length of the larger lens, but that's the tradeoff. (Have not used the 18 - 105 or 18 - 200 lenses.)
Nov 30, 2021 23:38:22 #
Personally, I’d go with the 18-140mm lens. I have three copies of this lens mounted to three of my DX cameras, which I use to photograph middle school and high school sports teams and the athletes individual pics. The lens has a good zoom range and is sharp with no lens creep whatsoever. If you can afford it, get it. You won’t regret your decision.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.