par4fore Loc: Bay Shore N.Y.

"decent walk around lens" for me Nikon 18-200mm

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

My walk-around, all purpose lens is the Nikon 24-120, love this lens and it works for so many different subjects. I have long lenses to cover the greater ranges. If I were to need a longer distance I would use my Nikon 70-200, as it's lighter than my long lenses and does not need a tripod.

Gifted One Loc: S. E. Idaho

I was amazed at the new Tamron 18-400 very light weight and easy to mange. As previously stated I have a negative bias toward expanded zoom range. Tamron's newest is a 22.2 zoom range. I think this would be a great glass for some.

J. R.

tazman77 Loc: Wisconsin

Take a look at Nikons 18-140mm lens, I hardly ever take mine off my D7100 it works for so many different shooting situations has just right amont of zoom ability.

deanc56

I typically use the Nikon 24-70 as my walk-around. But, I've just purchased the new version Nikon 70-200 2.8, so we'll see....

appealnow Loc: Dallas, Texas

You get answers all over the map, depending on personal preferences. I have the D5300 and did China wonderfully with the kit 18-55. In preparing to travel to Cambodia, the Mekong River and Japan I wanted a "travel lens." I was debating between the 18-300 and the 18-200 at the camera store the day the Nikon rep was there. I asked for his advice he said to go with the newer lens, the 18-300, 3.5-6.3. I have looked at reviews until I can't see straight--of the 18?-140, the 18-200 and the 18-300. I have used my lens on one trip to San Antonio and Austin. I have to say that the photos I took seemed a bit soft with the 18-300--not as sharp as I think they ought to be- and I frankly haven't decided what I think of the lens, but I am not overwhelmed. It's rare I really need to zoom that far. I think if I were to go to Yellowstone I would get a long lens. I do have a full frame AF 70-200, which I have used Colorado and it's sharp as a tack. When I travel, I use 18 or so mm more than one would think, close quarters, in museums, etc. Before going on my next trip to the Far East, I will decide if I want a shorter zoom lens to carry all day or just take the 18-55 kit lens. I guess my conclusion is that if you value sharpness, go with the shorter 140 or 200 or a shorter one for general travel not involving wildlife.

mgraham4fx

This is my first response as I'm new to UHH. I am certainly not as experienced as most of the photographers that have replied and that should be taken into consideration. My camera is an APS-C Canon 80D. My technical knowledge is limited compared to most of those I've read here on UHH. I do, however, own the Sigma 18-300mm lens and use as my walk-around. I performed a test between my new Sigma 18-35mm Art Lens, (reviewed as one of their sharpest), my Sigma 18-300mm, and my Canon 50mm f/1.4. Without filters and using the same subject, light, and focal lengths of 35mm for the Sigmas and 50mm for the Canon for obvious reasons, (Not a completely bullet proof test I know). Shot @ f/11 with a reasonably fast shutter speed, (1/400th I think), ISO 200. I know I should have used a tripod, but with the light, and with IS, all three images would have the same result. The Sigma Art was best, but only very slightly over the 18-300mm. The Canon 50mm came in third but all were very close. Shooting the Canon and Sigma 18-300mm @50mm the Sigma was slightly better. The subject was a golfball sized bangle hanging from our drapes. It was tightly wrapped with hundreds of different colored tiny threads then tied at the bottom and the hundreds of threads hung down below. All tiny details and various colors. Bottom line for me, I find it's a good lens, gets me in close when I need it, and is wide enough without constantly changing lenses. Sorry for the length of the response but hope it helps.

Marilia Loc: Dallas, TX

Love my Tamron 16-300mm, it works perfectly for what I need, wide and close ups...perfect for travel!

guardineer

I purchased the Nikon 18-300, taken a few thousand pictures while the kit Nikon 18-55 has taken exactly 1 photo. The Nikon 200-500 & 1.4 TC is on my wish list. (D5500)

guardineer

I purchased the Nikon 18-300, taken a few thousand pictures while the kit Nikon 18-55 has taken exactly 1 photo. The Nikon 200-500 & 1.4 TC is on my wish list. (D5500). I take landscape, wildlife, birds, sunsets/rises, even milky way. It is not a Regis Talbert pro setup but it is darn good.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

None of those are "walk-around" lenses. Those are "do-it-all-but-none-of-it-particularly-well" extreme Super Zooms (10X and greater) for people who are too lazy to carry a second lens and change it when needed. They sort of defeat the whole purpose of buying an interchangeable lens camera. Okay, okay... They do serve some purposes, such as for travel when you're really limited how much you can take with you, for example. But they inevitably compromise in various ways... slow focus, lower image quality, small & variable apertures, significant distortions, etc.

A "walk-around" zoom is actually one that's moderate wide angle to normal to short telephoto... A general purpose lens that's, say, a 16-80mm, 16-85mm, 17-50mm, 17-55mm, 17-70mm, 18-55mm, 18-105mm, 24-70mm, 24-85mm, or 24-120mm.

GPS Phil Loc: Dayton Ohio

Thanks Alan for a sensible posting based on experience. I wonder at times if many know what sharpness and clarity is. You can be very happy with "nice shots" till you take a breath taking sharp image with quality equipment. To many this is not important which is always hard for me to understand. I have a soft image button on my PC, Delete!

MtnMan Loc: ID

My wife loves her Nikon 18-300.

Note there are at least two versions and opinions as to which is best. I think hers is the older model.

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

So who made you the Dictionary editor?

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

I have the Nikkor 200-500 and 1.4X teleconverter combo I use on my D500. I also have the the same camera as Regis but I generally don't use it the same way. The 5DSR has more than twice the resolution the D5500 has plus it's full frame and costs a boat load more. Yes, the 5DSR and whichever Canon L series lenses that's attached to it is capable of producing outstanding images, but I'm quite happy with the results the Nikon produces and when you get your 200-500 I'm sure you will be too. It's a great lens for the price.