Check out Software and Computer Support for Photographers section of our forum.
Nikon 18-300mm
Mar 10, 2015 14:47:53 #
I've been thinking about buying one of these but all the reports are so wide and varied....
Do any of you Hogs actually own and use one and can give me an honest opinion...not hearsay?
I have the 55-300mm and it's brilliant but would like something a bit wider at the short end (18mm)
My every day walk about lens is the brilliant 18-105mm but the extra zoom of the 18-300mm appeals to me.
I know there are other alternatives but just want a genuine opinion of this lens, not a list of other options.
Cheers,
Ron.
Do any of you Hogs actually own and use one and can give me an honest opinion...not hearsay?
I have the 55-300mm and it's brilliant but would like something a bit wider at the short end (18mm)
My every day walk about lens is the brilliant 18-105mm but the extra zoom of the 18-300mm appeals to me.
I know there are other alternatives but just want a genuine opinion of this lens, not a list of other options.
Cheers,
Ron.
Mar 10, 2015 17:29:42 #
Have not actually used this lens; but at this price it should be pretty darn good.
Mar 10, 2015 17:57:18 #
ebrunner wrote:
Have not actually used this lens; but at this price it should be pretty darn good.
I have seen it around the $800AUS mark Erich but haven't looked seriously as yet. I want a few opinions from users before I take the plunge...
Mar 10, 2015 21:15:32 #
You'll find good and bad reviews for every lens. You'll also get good information and bad information on the net. I'm not big on user reviews. The only ones that I pay any attention to are Verified reviews at B&H. I suggest checking them.
Mar 11, 2015 09:23:12 #
IJC1962
Loc: Motown
My wife has this on her D7000 and loves it
She is not a camera buff like me and she likes the convenience of not having to change lenses and she is more than happy with the picture quality
If you want convenience, mega zoom range and a forever clean sensor then go for it
She is not a camera buff like me and she likes the convenience of not having to change lenses and she is more than happy with the picture quality
If you want convenience, mega zoom range and a forever clean sensor then go for it
Mar 11, 2015 09:36:38 #
I have had one for about 2 years and it stays on the camera (D5100) almost always. Some weakness at both ends but between ~ 20 and ~270 tack sharp. I try to shoot around f8 most of the time.
Mar 11, 2015 10:15:41 #
Tt
SX2002 wrote:
I bought one because I wasn't getting the reach I wanted from my 24-70. I didn't think it would be as useful in some situations, but I was willing to deal with that. As it turns out, the 18-300 is AMAZING! It's sharp--although I never rack it all the way out or use it at 18mm--fast enough for my landscape and garden shooting, and light enough to carry all day. It's parked on my camera 90% of the time. If you buy it, you'll love it.I've been thinking about buying one of these but a... (show quote)
Check out True Macro-Photography Forum section of our forum.
Mar 11, 2015 10:27:47 #
Mar 11, 2015 11:41:42 #
I used the 18-200 for a while and was impressed. It was on the camera most of the time. Then when the 18-300 came along I purchased it and have been very happy with it. I find that the 18-300 is a little sharper than the 18-200. There is still distortion at the wide end but easily corrected.
But I also use the 28-300 on a D800E. I like to be ready.
But I also use the 28-300 on a D800E. I like to be ready.
Mar 11, 2015 11:44:23 #
I've used one for over 2 yrs. Works fine. I'd buy it again. I use it on a D800 & D300.
Mar 11, 2015 12:42:07 #
I agonized over this for quite a while and finally went with the Sigma 18-300 for $600. It's very sharp and can be microadjusted with your computer if you have the $60 Sigma USB dock. Four different zoom ranges can be adjusted. I've been very happy with it. It's lighter than the Nikon and is my walking around lens. The zoom turns in the opposite direction of the Nikon 55-300 I replaced, but you get used to it quickly. Give the Sigma a look.
Check out Photo Critique Section section of our forum.
Mar 11, 2015 13:21:23 #
SX2002 wrote:
I've been thinking about buying one of these but a... (show quote)
It's a good lens for what you want but do not spend more than $600.00
Mar 11, 2015 13:33:02 #
Don Fischer
Loc: Antelope, Ore
I am planning on getting an 18-270 Tamron one of these days but if I was thinking, going from 18 to 300 in a zoom there's got to be some trade off's. Quality of the photo at the extream end's will probably suffer but, will it suffer enough to be noticeable to some one just looking at photo's? I doubt it. Probably will be with someone determined to see something that could improve it climbing toward perfect. I have now an 18-105, a 55-300 and a 70-300. Take's two lens to cover everything between 18 and 300! You could go for a third lens that splits the high end of the lowest zoom and the low end of the highest but, then your end up moving a lot or changing lens a lot. I have a 28-200 and for me, it's probably the best walk around lens I have and it does take photo's more than acceptable to me. The person that has to be happy with a photograph is the person that took it and then the client if there is one!
Mar 11, 2015 19:32:34 #
bq40
Loc: Sydney Australia
SX2002 wrote:
I've been thinking about buying one of these but a... (show quote)
Hi, I had one on my D7100. I found it quite good but one thing you may need to consider it that I found it quite heavy compared to the tamron 16-300 after carrying it around for a day.
Mar 11, 2015 19:40:28 #
There are two versions of this lens. One is an f/3.5-5.6 and the one the OP is asking about is the f/3.5-6.3. The two year old lens and the heavier lens are the older f/3.5-5.6 version.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Commercial and Industrial Photography section of our forum.