Attention all D7000+ owners: I have decided on a D7100. So, which lens? I am a fairly experienced amateur with most interest in landscape and travel. I cannot afford FX, so looking for...

Rodney1234

I have decided on a D7100. So, which lens? I am a fairly experienced amateur with most interest in landscape and travel. I cannot afford FX, so looking for best quality DX. Usually shoot between 20-200 mm and a lot of low light ( sunrise/set, city,etc). I have been considering 18-140, 18-105, 18-200. Your thoughts and/or other suggestions.

jaybyrd Loc: Oceanside, CA

I have the 18-140 and really like it. very sharp, and quick.

CO

The only thing that bothers me about superzoom lenses is that all that I have used or read test reviews about have lots of barrel distortion at wide angle settings and lots of pincushion distortion and long focal length settings. I got the Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 DX lens. It's sharp and has about half the distortion of the superzooms.

RJNaylor Loc: Delmar, New York

I think it depends on what you want to do with the photos and how you want to use the camera. I like the 18-200 for its huge zoom range so if I am trying to tell a story I can frame in all kinds of ways. I mostly shoot in manual though so I like the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS for the constant aperture, better light transmission, and overall color and feel.

Curve_in Loc: Virginia

I got a used 17-55mm f/2.8G ED DX. I use it at the wide end most of the time and I'm very happy with the results. My 70-300 rarely gets used.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

I won't give you advice on what mm, but just a thought. Don't overlook older lenses.

I just moved from D3100 to D7100 and discovered my lens collection was pretty sucky, so I'm trying to get some better glass. I would love to have a Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 VR II, but that one's $2400. :( But I have a 1980 something AF Nikkor 70-200 f/4-5.6 that meters and auto focuses on the D7100, is tack sharp and maintains focus through the zoom range. Paid $75 for it and I'll be using it until I can afford the VR.

LarryM Loc: Northfield, MN

I heartily endorse the Nikon 17-55mm for general use. It's heavy, though, but the IQ is superb and the AF is fast and accurate. Watch Craig's List and other places, and you should be able to pick up a solid copy for ~$700.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

LarryM wrote:

I heartily endorse the Nikon 17-55mm for general use. It's heavy, though, but the IQ is superb and the AF is fast and accurate. Watch Craig's List and other places, and you should be able to pick up a solid copy for ~$700.

The 17-55 is absolutely the best DX zoom lens Nikon has made.
A pro lens in every way; build quality, performance, weight and price.
Built when Nikon didn't make a Full Frame body.
Once you've used one, you'll never go back to a kit lens.

The 16-85 is pretty good, but when the light goes down it doesn't come close to the 17-55.

steve_stoneblossom Loc: Rhode Island, USA

Another endorsement for the 17-55. My go-to lens when I started with my D70, then I went full frame and it mostly sat for awhile.
Recently added a D7100, and the 17-55 is back off the shelf. Doesn't have super-long reach, but a great lens nevertheless.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

The 17-55 looks good, but I'm also looking at the 70-200. Will I miss the gap between 55 to 70mm? Are there other comparables that will fill that gap? I don't need anything longer than 200mm.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

OddJobber wrote:

The 17-55 looks good, but I'm also looking at the 70-200. Will I miss the gap between 55 to 70mm? Are there other comparables that will fill that gap? I don't need anything longer than 200mm.

My favorite comedian, Steven Wright, says: "You can't have everything, where would you put it?" You want fast and good, you'll have to give up range. I really don't think you would miss the gap that much,if at all. On the longer end, 15mm doesn't make as big a difference compared to the shorter focal lengths.

I have a Sigma 50-150 2.8 EX that is amazing. Another great DX lens they've updated with OS, VR , IS... whatever they call it. I sometimes use mine with the matched multiplier and don't notice any degradation. I don't shoot test charts for a living.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

That's my thinking. Thanks, Goofy. I don't want to have to start planning all over with Nikon's 80 lenses plus Sigma, Tokina, Tamron, .....

EDIT: OK, I can look at one more. :D

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

OddJobber wrote:

That's my thinking. Thanks, Goofy. I don't want to have to start planning all over with Nikon's 80 lenses plus Sigma, Tokina, Tamron, .....

Again, these are DX lenses, but some of the best, IMHO.
I use the D800 most of the time now but the 50-150 is almost always on a Fuji S5pro for studio portraits. I think the combo is pretty hard to beat. I just shoot jpegs with it... (Gasps are heard around the world)

Back to the lenses... It's no coincidence that the best zoom lenses usually have no more than a 3x range.

GPS Phil Loc: Dayton Ohio

OddJobber wrote:

That's my thinking. Thanks, Goofy. I don't want to have to start planning all over with Nikon's 80 lenses plus Sigma, Tokina, Tamron, .....

EDIT: OK, I can look at one more. :D

Thought I would throw in my .02 on this thing. I have both the D7000 and the D7100 and use the 16-85mm on both and the new Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 Art lens which is almost scary sharp. The first for daylight the second for low light. I have 8 other lenses, but these two seem to get used most. The one exception is the 70-200 2.8 used for aircraft in flight. Too heavy for me to use as a walk around.

Phil

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

GPS Phil wrote:

Thought I would throw in my .02 on this thing. I have both the D7000 and the D7100 and use the 16-85mm on both and the new Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 Art lens which is almost scary sharp. The first for daylight the second for low light.

Phil

I'm done buying DX lenses but the new Sigma Art line has caught my interest. If I were to do it over again with this option, it might have become a favorite. Check it out too, OddJobber! (It never ends, does it?)