Gandalf67 wrote:
I am thinking of purchasing either a Nikon dx 18-55 vr and a 55-300 vr or an 18-300 vr. While I like the idea of one lens, I don’t want to sacrifice image quality. I am a hobbiest, not a professional. I mostly use my camera while traveling and take a wide variety of pictures. Any help would be appreciated. I would be pairing the lenses with either a D5600 or a D7500. Thanks
I'll address AF-S VR lenses first (I have and use with reasonable regularity), then AF-P: If you have questions or want more detail or an opinion on one versus the other, just ask and I'll tell you what I think. I use these on D90, D7100 and D7200. AF-P on D7100 and D7200. And yes I own and use all these, so feel I can competently comment on them. Although I use and love them, I won't go back as far as the AF-AF-D, pre-VR lenses.
If you are not a pixel peeper, any of these will probably serve you well, and some folks wouldn't even see enough difference to worry about it. Several have been purchased from working professionals, who claimed to use them for stuff in their galleries.
AF-S VR = 18-55 and 18-105, 18-140, 18-200*, 18-300* - no complaints on any, fast and sharp, usage choice based on range needed/size/weight... *of the two, I prefer the 18-300, besides reach, the results just look a bit better. On the flip side, you can pick up the 18-200 models quite reasonable in the used marketplace, the 18-300 is pricier. I actually like the 18-105/140 models better than the 18-200, I think they are a bit sharper.
AF-S VR = 55-300 & 70-300: 55-300 my copy just a tad soft from 250 to 300, but otherwise fine, 70-300 pretty sharp & fast (two copies, like both).
AF-P - just the 70-300 for now, one non-VR/two VR (non VR bought to scavange the mount for a wounded VR, but repaired the VR mount instead, so just kept the non-VR). Two VR's, both sharp and fast, as is the non-VR.
VR vs non VR - When you don't need it, no big deal, but it is wonderful when you do need it. If you are a active/mobile shooter, or have shake/weave/balance/steadyness issues, VR/VC/OS/IS is a pure wonder! Tamron, Sigma with IC & OS- 18-250 and 18-270 models, no complaints, fast and sharp.
For the hobby shooter, unless you get a turkey, or select a mismatch for a shoot, all will yield great results for general work, with proper technique.
Are Prime lenses better, Yes.
I bought all mine used, some in mint condition, a couple needed new mounts, and/or cleaning/lubrication, I do this a lot, it may/may not be right for anyone else. I probably have about 75% less $$ invested than those who buy new. I have never had a used lens fail, if that is a concern. I have bought and repaired "broken" lenses, they still work too.
Plastic Mounts = Dear Nikon, the plastic mounts are lightweight and useful as a "breakaway" device, and may actually save some gear from harder impacts, but in general, they suck. The AF-S mounts are generally cheap and easy, the AF-P mounts, hard to find and expensive(so far), never mind the weight, please go back to metal!
These are just my opinions, for detailed specs and scientific testing, do some research, all the info is out there. Hope this is somewhat helpful.
I think I need to sell a couple, I know my better half feels that way!!
My $.02