busted_shutter

So finally ready to buy my new lenses. But everytime I think I have a better lens picked out, someone comes along and says, "Nope...kit lens!". 18-55 kit lens...18-105 kit lens....So what determines the lens to be "kit"? Looking to buy 2 refurbished, with focal lengths covering from 18-300. So what lenses aren't kit?? Will probably not be upgrading anytime within the next 10 years(if at all)...so FX is probably out the equation. Oh...and camera is the Nikon 5100.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

Rex, what camera system do you have?
Bit hard to make lens recommendations if we don't know which body it has to fit.

busted_shutter

Sorry...edited post as you replied. Nikon 5100.

Stef C Loc: Conshohocken (near philly) PA

A "Kit" lens is just one that comes with the camera. For instance, the 18-55mm, 18-105, and 55-200 all have come/come with various model Nikons. It's only a kit lens because it's part of the kit. The 18-55 VR is prob the best kit lens ever made, and is a VERY sharp lens.

Nikon makes an 18-300mm Lens, and a 28-300mm Lens. Sounds like the 18 would cover everything you want..

busted_shutter

But how sharp at the max of 300? Are optics these days that advanced for such a wide range in focal length, or are you better to go with more lenses w/o that wide range?

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

Ok.
Sorry to confuse you but here is a link from Ken Rockwells site.
He updates but leaves the old info in there, so this page will give conflicting advice as to which lens suits which range.
For a particular range he will say "this is the best lens ever and the only lens you ever need" and then down below he says nearly exactly the same about a different lens in the same range.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/dx-dream-team.htm

Personally I had the 18-200 VRii which gets good raps in this link and elswhere but I wasn't very impressed with mine. It was a good close focus lens but I found it too soft at the long end. I am of the opinion that these "superzoom" lenses are a jack of all trades and masters of none.
But I have heard from a couple of sources that the 28-300mm might be an exception to my judgement.

You should be able to get better quality by going EG 18-55 & 70-300 so the zoom is "less stretched"
BUT - I havent shot those lenses, so some one who has shot them, and been able to compare them to others, will have better info than me.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

If you went the way of the 28-300 then pairing it with a sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 ex dc hsm would cover a lot of bases.

sportyman140 Loc: Juliette, GA

I have the Sigma 10-20 mm, also Sigma's 18-250 mm, 50-200 mm; 70-300 mm all are great lens great glass too. I have been so pleased with my glass and performance too. Sigma makes lenses for Nikon too.

Erv Loc: Medina Ohio

On my D300s, the walk around do everything for me is the 17-55 and the 28-300. Both are great lenses and very sharp.
Erv

wilsondl2 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska

It all depends on what you want to shoot. If you want to take low light pictures the "Kit" lenses will just not do it. If you do not want to put out the big bucks for the f2.8 fixed aperture lenses you may want to consider dthe 50MM f1.8 prime. The advise I always give is shoot a lot with the lenses you have and note when ever your lens will not do what you want it to do and then look over your notes and buy a lens that will do these things. As far as covering 18 to whatever you may never use the longer lens and need a shorter lens or a micro. See what you need for the kind of photography you do or want to do. - Dave

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Read the suggestions here, and then take a look at lens reviews.

Lens Reviews
http://kenrockwell.com
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/
http://lens-reviews.com/
http://photozone.de/
http://dpreview.com

https://www.google.com/search?q=nikon+50mm+1.8+vs+nikon+50mm+1.4

Info:
http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html

Bridges Loc: Memphis, Charleston SC, now Nazareth PA

The 28-300 is getting much better reviews (in the hands of users especially on this blog) than the 18-200. Yes, it is full frame but you are not wasting the extra coverage, you will just be shooting in the "sweet spot" of the lens and avoiding some of the edge softness that exists in almost all lenses. The 18-200 VRII new is a couple hundred dollars less than the 28-300, but if you get a referb, you can have it for about the same price. Don't be afraid of buying referb as long as it has been done by the factory -- sometimes they are better than new since it will have been gone over one on one with a technician -- which is not the case with every lens coming off the production line. I like buying from Cameta Camera in NY. I have purchased a couple of referb bodies from them and they arrived looking like totally new equipment. If you buy referb from the Nikon store you will get a 90 day warranty. If you buy a Nikon referb from Cameta, they give you a year warranty. I know the 28 on a crop body will not give you the wide angle you may want but the person suggesting a wide angle in addition to the 28-300 has taken that into consideration. One last thing to consider – the 28-300 is much more salable and will hold it’s value better since it is usable on both crop sensor and full frame cameras (just in case you would ever want to sell it).

Best of luck with your purchase.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Refurb for $900, only $25 less than I paid for new. Of course this is from Nikon, so others might have it for less. It's a fairly new lens, though.

http://shop.nikonusa.com/store/nikonusa/en_US/pd/ThemeID.18145600/productID.213462500

Scoutman Loc: Orlando, FL

Before acting, suggest you follow-up on what Jerry41 the Linklover posted. He always leads to good resources. His omnipresence here like a quasi deity, looking out for us all.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

What do you mean quasi? :D