Suggestions for New Lens(s)
Aug 7, 2016 21:02:58 #
I wrote into U H last week and received so many wonderful opinions and am now moving to the next stage. I shoot with a Nikon D 7000 and have been using a Tamron 18-300, which is soft. I took your suggestions and tried a number of tests and have concluded that I need a new lens or two to replace the Tamron. In my research I found that the Nikkor 16-80 looks like it gets crisp images. If I go with that I'll need another good lens to cover me to 300 mm. I was on a chat twice today with B and H today and one rep suggested that I go with the Nikkor 18-300 while another rep suggested both the 16-80 and the 70-300. I'd be most appreciative for any guidance you can give me. I'm not excited about throwing out a ton of $ but I do want quality. Thanks again.
Aug 7, 2016 21:03:11 #
Aug 7, 2016 21:07:56 #
Aug 7, 2016 21:11:10 #
Don Fischer
Loc: Antelope, Ore
I've got the 55-300 and it does fine for me. Had the 18-105 and it also worked fine. But I wanted more range so sold it and got the 18-140, love it!
Aug 7, 2016 21:26:45 #
mas24
Loc: Southern CA
The Nikon FX 28-300mm is a better choice than the Nikon DX 18-300mm. Good all around everyday lens. The 16-80mm, I am not familiar with. You won't need the 70-300mm if you get get the 28-300mm. But if you decide on the 16-80mm, then adding the 70-300mm would make a good combination. Compare the price of one vs. two lenses.
Aug 8, 2016 06:13:21 #
I had the new Nikon 16-80mm f/2.8-4 lens. I already had two of the Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 lenses but I thought would give the new lens a try. The new 16-80mm is way overpriced. I ended up returning it. The image quality is no better than the 16-85mm and it had a severe back focusing issue. I had to set in -12 AF fine tuning in my cameras and that still wasn't enough. Save a bundle of money and get the 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 lens instead.
I have the Nikon 70-300mm lens. It's an outstanding lens for the money. It has low distortion throughout the entire zoom range and is sharp. I try to stay away from superzoom lenses like the 18-300mm because they usually have a lot of barrel distortion and the wide settings and a lot of pincushion distortion at the long end focal lengths.
I have the Nikon 70-300mm lens. It's an outstanding lens for the money. It has low distortion throughout the entire zoom range and is sharp. I try to stay away from superzoom lenses like the 18-300mm because they usually have a lot of barrel distortion and the wide settings and a lot of pincushion distortion at the long end focal lengths.
Aug 8, 2016 06:56:43 #
theehmann wrote:
I wrote into U H last week and received so many wo... (show quote)
If you want quality glass, stay away from DX lenses with the exception of ultra wides. Also, stay away from very wide zooms. The shorter the zoom range the better. Also, don't a lens that has the plastic mounts; they are the lower quality ones.
Aug 8, 2016 07:09:04 #
theehmann wrote:
I wrote into U H last week and received so many wo... (show quote)
My workhorse lens is the Nikon 18~300. It is sharp, it covers pretty much every range I use, and the price is reasonable. What more can I ask of it?
Aug 8, 2016 09:20:36 #
I am afraid that in photography quality and money march together.
My simple answer is go with the 16-80 and 70-300 VR. You can find the 70-300 at reasonable prices in the second hand market.
My simple answer is go with the 16-80 and 70-300 VR. You can find the 70-300 at reasonable prices in the second hand market.
Aug 8, 2016 14:22:35 #
Since you already have the short lens, then I suggest the 70-300. Read Ken Rockwell's reviews of the Nikon lenses. One nice thing about his reviews is that he gives the weight of the lens, and if weight makes a difference it will affect your decision. I just got the 18-200 and haven't used it enough to comment. Got that over the 18-300 because of the weight. Might not seem like much, but after you carry it for 3-4 hours or more you will notice the weight. Don't be afraid to look for excellent condition used lenses from the big camera stores.
Aug 8, 2016 17:22:35 #
You may want to send your Tamron to Tamron's service center. The warranty time is for 6 years. My Tamron 18-270mm went soft, I sent it in with my camera body specs, it came back like a "L" quality lens. They cleaned it, removed manufacturing debris, replaced a element, calibrated to my Canon bodies, and now I have a excellent lens.
B
B
Aug 9, 2016 01:09:58 #
theehmann wrote:
I wrote into U H last week and received so many wo... (show quote)
Ever thought about a prime 300mm ? The Nikon 300 f/4 afs is marked down to $949 most places. I have one it's absolutely a phenomenal lens . Razor sharp even with the 1.4 tc. Just a thought
Aug 9, 2016 07:31:07 #
O2Ra wrote:
Ever thought about a prime 300mm ? The Nikon 300 f/4 afs is marked down to $949 most places. I have one it's absolutely a phenomenal lens . Razor sharp even with the 1.4 tc. Just a thought
For that matter, the older 300mm f4.0 AF lens is remarkable also. It doesn't have the AF-S motor but is as sharp and csn be bought on the used market for even less. It's also a true f4.0; measure the front elements and you will see what I am saying.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.