Walkaround lens (Page 6): Excellent lens. I just got this lens and it will be on the camera most of the time. For special occasions, I use the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8. The best normal lens...

GrandmaG Loc: Flat Rock, MI

rmorrison1116 wrote:

For D7100, Nikkor AF-S 16-80 1:2.8-4E ED VR. This is what is on my D7200 most often. It is fast, sharp and has excellent VR. Hands down, the best DX kit lens Nikon makes.

Excellent lens. I just got this lens and it will be on the camera most of the time. For special occasions, I use the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8. The best normal lens for ME is the Sigma ART 18-35mm f/1.8 or the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 if I want a lighter setup.

On the other hand, my husband likes the Nikon 18-300 because he likes to zoom in a lot; but usually not more than 180mm. Also, he never changes his lens; so, for him, this works. If I were BUYING an all-purpose lens, I would probably go for an 18-200 by Nikon.

I agree with the advice given on this site. Look at your images and see what range you shoot at the most. That is your answer for everyday shots. Ask yourself what purpose the 300mm serves, i.e.: zooming in on buildings or landscapes? If I could afford it, I would just buy a 300mm f/4 prime lens for those situations or even a 400 prime.

Now that I've thoroughly confused you, the answer always is, " It depends"!

kbatschke Loc: Chicagoland-west

GPS Phil wrote:

I was given some good advice when I asked that que... (show quote)

Interesting that say this Phil. Great advice!! I did the same thing last week when trying to decide between a 28mm and 35mm for my Sony mirrorless. Found that I had been favoring the 28mm end of things on my 28mm - 70mm Canon zoom on my 70d as well as my kit 16mm - 50mm on my Sony so ended up buying the 28mm f2 Sony for my 6500. Very happy with the lens and it's a fixture on the camera.

Einreb92 Loc: Philadelphia

Manglesphoto wrote:

I have been using the nikkor 24-120 for quite a few years on D300 and D7100 and a same in a FX on my D800 and D810.
However neither lens walks, I have to tote them everywhere.

Lol

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

Pilot 6 wrote:

Grandpa, walkaround lens is like beauty---it's in the eye of the beholder. For you young jocks its a DSLR with an intimidating heavy zoomer. For older guys who can still walk, a P&S or bridge camera. For those in the middle, maybe a DSLR with a small, unobtrusive prime. For me at 91 it's my DSLR with a 40mm tiny Voigtlander prime. Comfortable one hand carry with a wrist strap tether.

Which is why it helps to define what you are asking about. Like "What is a good walkaround lens for doing urban street photography?" or "What is a good walkaround lens for foreign travel?"

NormanTheGr8 Loc: Racine, Wisconsin

Nikonman44 wrote:

Wonder why they dont go the little extra and do it in 16 400???

Tamron just came out with a 18 - 400

bpulv Loc: Buena Park, CA

If you are interested in quality photography, a "one size fits all" solution is not the answer. I have multiple walk around lenses for my D800 (full frame). Before I go out, I try to determine what I am likely to see and choose the one lens that is most likely to do the job. For example, if I am going to walk around the city, a 50mm works well. On the other hand, if I am taking a tour where there are both interior and exterior opportunities, a 24-70mm or 28-105mm makes sense. I seldom use a long telephoto because I can usually get similar results enlarging a portion of a 70mm or 105mm picture in post production. If I am only shooting interiors, a super wide lens is in order.

Look at the types of situations you typically shoot in and develope a lens plan for each of those situations.

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

Grandpa wrote:

Looking for a decent walk around lens for my Nikon D7100. I would like your opinion on the following lens:
Nikon 18-300mm
Sigma 18-300mm DC Macro OS HSM
Tamron 16-300mm VC PZD

Thank you

I walked around for 9 years and 600,000 photos with a Tamron 28-300mm. Last month I upgraded to new technology and got the Tamron 18-300mm. Quite happy with both decisions.

ejelliston Loc: Mansfield, TX

I use the Nikon 18-300. I have been pleased with it in many different settings/circumstances.

jackpinoh Loc: Kettering, OH 45419

Grandpa wrote:

Looking for a decent walk around lens for my Nikon D7100. I would like your opinion on the following lens:
Nikon 18-300mm
Sigma 18-300mm DC Macro OS HSM
Tamron 16-300mm VC PZD

Thank you

None of the above. 17-55mm or 16-80mm would be a better choice. Sharper and lighter. Most photos taken walking around will be within 35-55mm on a full frame camera (17-37mm on a DX camera).

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

Grandpa wrote:

Looking for a decent walk around lens for my Nikon D7100. I would like your opinion on the following lens:
Nikon 18-300mm
Sigma 18-300mm DC Macro OS HSM
Tamron 16-300mm VC PZD

Thank you

The Nikon is better, but for a walk=around I found the 18-200 to be superior. I think it is sharper, lighter weight and I never encountered a need for the extra 100mm. Well, I did but I had a Sigma 400 for that.

I've had several Sigmas and all but one of them have been great. The 400mm was a used lens and did have focus problems. Sent it to CRISCAM and they updated firmware and so on. I am still using it on my Sony. So I've had positives with both Sigma and Nikon but not that particular lens.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Kissel vonKeister wrote:

I don't have that kind of experience because I've never had really long range zoom ratios. My experience is this: (And I dislike the constant references to what EYE have)

I asked my questions solely because you strongly stated a position

Kissel vonKeister wrote:

None of the above. Too much zoom range.

and I figure such a strong opinion must be based on some kind of evidence or experience

MW

Grandpa wrote:

Looking for a decent walk around lens for my Nikon D7100. I would like your opinion on the following lens:
Nikon 18-300mm
Sigma 18-300mm DC Macro OS HSM
Tamron 16-300mm VC PZD

Thank you

None of the above. Like some others say those are just too big and heavy to lug around all day. Sometimes if I know enough about what I might encounter while walking around I can pick an appropriate prime. (See other posts about advantages of a single prime).

If zoom is a must I like Nikon's 18-105mm. It's long enough for most things except bird, wild life and being the dirty old man standing o. the clif overlooking the beach.

Pilet

I love my 18-200 on the D-500. If had to only have one lens to take on most any trip that would be it.

kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA

Kissel vonKeister wrote:

None of the above. Too much zoom range.

I went with the 70-300 as I don't care much for the wide end. And the zoom ratio was less.

GPS Phil Loc: Dayton Ohio

kbatschke wrote:

Interesting that say this Phil. Great advice!! I did the same thing last week when trying to decide between a 28mm and 35mm for my Sony mirrorless. Found that I had been favoring the 28mm end of things on my 28mm - 70mm Canon zoom on my 70d as well as my kit 16mm - 50mm on my Sony so ended up buying the 28mm f2 Sony for my 6500. Very happy with the lens and it's a fixture on the camera.

As Paul Harvey used to say, here is the rest of the story. After shooting for a year or so with the 16-85, I again found that at least 70% of my shots were @ 16mm. When I purchased a full frame camera I matched it with a 24-105 Art lens, with very good results and purchased a 20mm 1.8 to carry in the bag just in case. Guess what, the 20 just seems to stay on the full frame, and that's about 12 mm on a cropped frame. I do have a 300mm, Nikon f/4 with VR, very light (36 oz ) that stays in my bag. A fantastic lens that gets used occasionally with great results, never for walking around. We all shoot different, and I guess that's part of the fun!

Phil