Howard5252 Loc: New York / Florida (now)

To answer your question ... absolutely! I have that exact combo D7100 and the 18~300 3.5-5.6 and consider it my "Work horse".
Do be careful, as someone pointed out, there are two 18~300; one stops at 5.6, and the other at 6.3. If you can afford the extra money, get the 5.6. If you have any questions, send me a PM. Now for the disclaimer: I should have written "I HAD that exact combo"; I recently sold the D7100 and now I have an 18~300 3.5 - 5.6 on my D7200. The weight may take some getting used to but well worth it.

Tet68survivor Loc: Pomfret Center CT

Absolutely! I use the 16-300 Tamron all the time! I do have other lenses for special stuff, but the 16-300 is my everyday lens!

ron james Loc: Cardiff Wales uk

hi Howard - i have taken on board that there is a difference between the 5.6 and 6.3 and certainly will be looking for where i can get the best deal on one - my collection of lens is certainly building up and with forum members help i should certainly cut any further mistakes by not purchasing lens which do not suit my requirements

many thanks indeed - holy grail doesnt exist but its fun searching for it!

vbr
ron

Howard5252 Loc: New York / Florida (now)

Remember, camera bodies come and go ... lenses tend to hang around; always get the best lens that you can afford. Cameta Camera is a good place to check. If you do, try to get Cathy, I'm sure any of the sales force is good and I use her. I get nothing for the plug ... just a feeling that I've done a good deed.

Ed Chu Loc: Las Vegas NV

me, too with the D7100 & 18-300

drbland42 Loc: Chad, Africa and Okla

I have used the D7100 with the Nikon 18-300 the more expensive version in 27 countries of central and eastern Europe last summer and this summer driving. This combo covers almost everything well.

ron james Loc: Cardiff Wales uk

there appears to be a mountain of the 6.3 version on ebay and just the odd 5.6 so that tells the story -either sky sports or one of the wifes kidneys will have to go to fund the more expensive 5.6 but needs must ! i just dont like to see her suffer but she is a sport so i am sure she can manage with just the one.

vbr
ron

wicook Loc: Alberta, Canada

I'm using the f6.3 version on my D7200 and love it. It performs well and is light enough to carry all day!

Bear2 Loc: Southeast,, MI

I use a Nikkor 18-200 3.5-5.6 VR ll, first on my D7000, and now on my D7200. It has been to Europe, Hawaii and Montana, as my only lens. Very sharp, and much lighter than the 18-300.

Duane

Robeng Loc: California

Here's my opinion.

As a member of Nikon Professional Service I get to use whatever Nikon equipment I want for free. I did a photoshoot of Machu Picchu back in 2014, I learned real fast that carrying 25+ of full frame camera gear is crazy when climbing up and down those Inca stairs. So this year, when I lead a photo group to China I knew we would be visiting the Great Wall. I contacted Nikon and had them send me a D500, battery grip and a 18mm-300mm lens to use. I left all my full frame gear at home. It was so much easier using the 18mm-300mm lens. It covered such a wide range that I didn't have to switch lens. It was a great walk around lens for me and I got images that rocked. I was real happy using the 18mm-300mm lens.

Don't get me wrong, the Nikon 28mm-300mm which I own is good to but it's designed for a full frame camera. The D7100 is an APS-C sensor camera. Also there are two version of the Nikon 18mm-300mm lens. I recommend the f/3.5-6.3 DX AF-S G ED, it cost more but it's worth it.

I added images that I took using a D500 with the 18mm-300mm lens.

Rob

ron james Loc: Cardiff Wales uk

fantastic pics rob

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

I don't shoot Nikon, so perhaps I should keep out of this - but your two lenses between them will, I am sure, because of the physical constraints on the IQ of long range zoom lenses, serve you better if IQ is a priority.

Pegasus Loc: Texas Gulf Coast

I have the Nikkor 18-300 DX 3.5-5.6G lens. It's a good lens but it is quite heavy. I used to have it on all the time but I have been using my Nikkor 18-140 DX a lot more over the last year. That is one fantastic lens in my estimation. It's the equivalent of a 27-210 and that suits most of my needs. If I plan to go somewhere where I know I will need more magnification, I put on the 18-300, but my "walk around" lens is that 18-140. When I travel I also bring the 35mm f/1.8 along in my pocket for indoors.

I find that the 18-300 is a little soft past 200 and if I were to do it again, I would probably get the 6.3 version. The IQ is the same according to reviews I've read but the weight savings are substantial. No, I am not getting rid of my 18-300.

jaycoffman Loc: San Diego

Not exactly the same but similar--I've used a Tamron 16-300 on my d7100 for three years now as a walk-around lens and have found it to be more than adequate for general photography. I just bough my first prime lens for lower light situations and will probably branch out and get a longer telephoto when I go back to Africa next year. But I find it very convenient to have just one lens with me for most of my photo excursions.

Ralphwg

I use the 18-300 3.5-5.6 on my D7100 as my go to lens. the second lens I use is the Tamron 10-24mm wide angle. I find both to be highly satisfactory. I have now reduced my lenses from 5 to 2. I find it makes my life simpler and easier and has not really hurt my photograph quality.