Best Normal Range Zoom for Nikon DX Camera: Nikon makes a number of zoom lenses that cover the wide angle to moderate telephoto range. The simplest is the 18-55mm kit lens. And the...

fetzler Loc: North West PA

Nikon makes a number of zoom lenses that cover the wide angle to moderate telephoto range. The simplest is the 18-55mm kit lens. And the most expensive is the 16-80 f2.8 -4.

I am most interested in the wide angle to moderate telephoto range. I have telephoto zoom lenses that come out once in awhile.

What is the best? What is the best for the buck? Does it really matter?

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

fetzler wrote:

Nikon makes a number of zoom lenses that cover the wide angle to moderate telephoto range. The simplest is the 18-55mm kit lens. And the most expensive is the 16-80 f2.8 -4.

I am most interested in the wide angle to moderate telephoto range. I have telephoto zoom lenses that come out once in awhile.

What is the best? What is the best for the buck? Does it really matter?

I have found the best bang for the buck in replacing the "kit" lens to be the Nikon DX 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 VR if you stay with DX lenses.

DRG777 Loc: Metro Detroit

In Nikkor, you can get 18-105, 18-140, and 18-200. Research them for cost and specs to find what you like the best.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

My question is, what is "normal range?"

WayneT Loc: Paris, TN

I have the 18-55, the 18-140 and the 55-300. If I were to re-buy I would go with the 18-300 AF-X DX If I was going to stay with a DX Body. If you plan on moving to a FX body anytime soon go with the 28-300mm FX lens and use your 18-55 for wider angle shots until you move up to FX.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

fetzler wrote:

Nikon makes a number of zoom lenses that cover the wide angle to moderate telephoto range. The simplest is the 18-55mm kit lens. And the most expensive is the 16-80 f2.8 -4.

I am most interested in the wide angle to moderate telephoto range. I have telephoto zoom lenses that come out once in awhile.

What is the best? What is the best for the buck? Does it really matter?

Nikon makes a nice collection of wide to short/medium tele lenses for DX. Other than the ones that reach to 300mm, they are all optically very good.

This is a nice list of DX options:

http://www.dslrbodies.com/lenses/lens-databases-for-nikon/thoms-recommended-lenses.html

And this lens is in a category of it's own, as are the other Art lenses from Sigma:

https://www.sigmaphoto.com/18-35mm-f18-dc-hsm-a

DRG777 Loc: Metro Detroit

Quote:

I have the 18-55, the 18-140 and the 55-300. If I were to re-buy I would go with the 18-300 AF-X DX If I was going to stay with a DX Body.

I did not like the image quality of the 18-300 and I have the 18-200 which has worked well.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

DRG777 wrote:

I did not like the image quality of the 18-300 and I have the 18-200 which has worked well.

What was the issue with the image quality of the 18-300? Vignetting, softness, etc., at the extreme ends, softness overall? That's one lens that has interested me, but I've been reluctant to get due to a number of folks giving it less than stellar reviews.

BebuLamar

Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8

Jim Bob

fetzler wrote:

Nikon makes a number of zoom lenses that cover the wide angle to moderate telephoto range. The simplest is the 18-55mm kit lens. And the most expensive is the 16-80 f2.8 -4.

I am most interested in the wide angle to moderate telephoto range. I have telephoto zoom lenses that come out once in awhile.

What is the best? What is the best for the buck? Does it really matter?

I can't say which is " the best". But the sigma 17-50 would certainly fall within that category in my opinion.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

Jim Bob wrote:

I can't say which is " the best". But the sigma 17-50 would certainly fall within that category in my opinion.

That's a pretty good range. I have the 18-140 Nikkor, and rarely use the long end of it.

Jim Bob

Wingpilot wrote:

That's a pretty good range. I have the 18-140 Nikkor, and rarely use the long end of it.

That is also an exceptional lens.

CO

MT Shooter wrote:

I have found the best bang for the buck in replacing the "kit" lens to be the Nikon DX 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 VR if you stay with DX lenses.

I have two of the Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 lenses. It's sharp, and has great build quality. It's just as good as the 16-80mm f/2.8-4 just with a little slower maximum aperture. The 16-80mm f/2.8-4 is way overpriced. I had one. I ended up returning it. It had a severe back focusing issue on all of my Nikon DSLR bodies. It needed to be a lot better for 1 grand.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

BebuLamar wrote:

Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8

I have 2 of those at work.
Constant f/2.8 maximum aperture through the whole range.
Built like a tank...same build quality as the 24-70 FX lens.
Designed back when Nikon's pro bodies had only DX sensors.
I'm sure it would have been part of the "trilogy" of lenses if Nikon's pro cameras didn't go full frame.
No VR, but I don't find it that useful on shorter focal lengths anyway.
Still use mine on the DX bodies.
I've seen them used for $525.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1473624/0?keyword=Nikon,17-55#13906366

It's just a 3x zoom, but if you notice, the pro level zoom lenses are all close to 3x.
To paraphrase Spiderman, "With great range comes great compromises"

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

CO wrote:

I have two of the Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 lenses. It's sharp, and has great build quality. It's just as good as the 16-80mm f/2.8-4 just with a little slower maximum aperture. The 16-80mm f/2.8-4 is way overpriced. I had one. I ended up returning it. It had a severe back focusing issue on all of my Nikon DSLR bodies. It needed to be a lot better for 1 grand.

As I have stated before, it's a great $500 lens that sells for $1000.