This is a two question post in one site. Im trying to determine which lens to get when I purchase the D7100. I contacted Nikon at Nikon.com and asked them what the difference between these 2 lenses?
AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR
AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3G ED VR
They told me the quality of plastic that goes into making the lens makes the 3.5-5.6G ED VR is more expensive. Is this true?
They also told me that there is no difference in the quality of picture. If this is true why is there 2 different models of the same 18-300mm lenses?
2nd question
When purchasing the D7100 is the quality of lens and pictures going to increase spending more money for the Nikon lens or would a Sigma or Tamron be better to buy? I want to buy the current lens the first time around and not having to up grade later. I will be using the camera/lens for travel and once in a while for wildlife. Im not a pro but demand high quality pictures from my self.
The original (f5.6) version of this lens is an all metal, weather sealed barrel.
The second series (f6.3) of the lens uses a weather sealed plastic barrel making it smaller and lighter, but losing a bit of light on the long end of the zoom.
With the $100 price difference I always recommend getting the original version.
(Although the new Sigma 18-300mm at $579 will equal or exceed the image quality of both the Nikons at a much better price)
Gene51
Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
dbeals wrote:
This is a two question post in one site. Im trying to determine which lens to get when I purchase the D7100. I contacted Nikon at Nikon.com and asked them what the difference between these 2 lenses?
AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR
AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3G ED VR
They told me the quality of plastic that goes into making the lens makes the 3.5-5.6G ED VR is more expensive. Is this true?
They also told me that there is no difference in the quality of picture. If this is true why is there 2 different models of the same 18-300mm lenses?
2nd question
When purchasing the D7100 is the quality of lens and pictures going to increase spending more money for the Nikon lens or would a Sigma or Tamron be better to buy? I want to buy the current lens the first time around and not having to up grade later. I will be using the camera/lens for travel and once in a while for wildlife. Im not a pro but demand high quality pictures from my self.
This is a two question post in one site. Im tryi... (
show quote)
I would avoid the 18-300 in either build. Both leave lots to be desired as far as image quality is concerned.
An 18-200 would serve you slightly better, providing good image quality at 18mm and decent at 200mm. At every focal length, the biggest drawback is corner and edge sharpness which is pretty awful in all of these Nikon superzooms.
http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/778-nikkorafsdx183003556vr?start=1http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/633-nikkor182003556vrii?start=1Take a look at this honest evaluation:
https://photographylife.com/the-question-of-18-300mm-lenses
Gene51 wrote:
I would avoid the 18-300 in either build. Both lea... (
show quote)
I wish the guy in Photography Life would say what he REALLY thinks... Good article, something to think about. Looks like if I move in this direction, it'll be the new Sigma with a USB dock to fine tune it.
Thanks for all the answered questions. I just placed an order for D7100 with Sigma 18-300
dbeals
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.