Seeking Advice on Replacing My "kit" Lens
Aug 4, 2014 15:48:21 #
David Popham
Loc: French Creek, British Columbia
Three years ago I bought a Nikon D7000 body along with the 18-105mm "kit" lens. Since then I bought a 70-300 lens to give me some "reach" for distant subjects. And last year I bought a Sigma 10-20mm wide angle lens for taking shots in tight places.
From more than one source I have learned that the kit lens does not produce the best quality image. It has served me very well, but I am now prepared to "upgrade" to a new lens. I have looked at the Nikon site, and the cost of a new lens of equivalent features is really expensive, at least it is with the Canadian dollar. So, I am asking you fellow members for some advice. And, please don't worry if I am overwhelmed with suggestions because all of them will help me figure out what I "really" want.
Thanks in advance for you comments and suggestions. And if you are ever on the Island, please let me know. I have covered most of its accessible spots.
David
From more than one source I have learned that the kit lens does not produce the best quality image. It has served me very well, but I am now prepared to "upgrade" to a new lens. I have looked at the Nikon site, and the cost of a new lens of equivalent features is really expensive, at least it is with the Canadian dollar. So, I am asking you fellow members for some advice. And, please don't worry if I am overwhelmed with suggestions because all of them will help me figure out what I "really" want.
Thanks in advance for you comments and suggestions. And if you are ever on the Island, please let me know. I have covered most of its accessible spots.
David
Aug 4, 2014 16:47:23 #
David Popham wrote:
Three years ago I bought a Nikon D7000 body along ... (show quote)
What is your opinion of the quality of your 18-105 lens? The Experts frequently label kit lenses as "poor" and some are. Others are very good. In my experience most kit lenses are capable of very good quality, they may be slow and not as well built, but, if used properly, you might have to make a really big enlargement to see much difference from a lens costing 3-6 times more! Does your 70-300 give you a better image at 105mm than your 18-105 at 105mm? You should test to see if there is a difference, use the same subject, focal length, f stop, shutter speed, focus point and ISO, tripod mount the camera and shoot with both lenses. If there is a noticeable difference, then an upgrade may be in order. I used to think that by spending more $ I'd always get better pictures, but usually found that by spending more time learning to use what I had yielded better results!
Aug 4, 2014 16:58:16 #
jaygreen55
Loc: Westport CT
David Popham wrote:
Three years ago I bought a Nikon D7000 body along ... (show quote)
The Nikon 16-85 sells for under 600 at B&H and is a very good lense that would complement your 70-300 vey well. The 17-55
F 2.8 is a pro level lens but insanely expensive at 1399 and has no VR
You might want to check out the Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4 macro which is also a good lens for 500. Both Sigma and Tamron have 17-50 F 2.8s
Aug 4, 2014 17:01:22 #
amehta
Loc: Boston
David Popham wrote:
Three years ago I bought a Nikon D7000 body along ... (show quote)
What does "is really expensive" mean to you, and what is your spending goal? Overall, I think your lens is good, and getting a better lens simply will cost you.
Which end of the 18-105mm zoom range do you tend to use most often?
Aug 4, 2014 17:10:12 #
David Popham wrote:
Three years ago I bought a Nikon D7000 body along ... (show quote)
When I had a T3i I had two Canon "kit lenses" and they did impressive work. I would assume that the Nikon lenses would do the same. I wouldn't be in a hurry to buy new until you can identify a definite problem with your current lens. You could end up spending money for little or no improvement. If you have photos you are unhappy with why not post some for review by people familiar with the lens? I would want more proof that a lens is lacking then just what someone had to say about "kit lenses".
Aug 4, 2014 18:39:46 #
David Popham wrote:
Three years ago I bought a Nikon D7000 body along ... (show quote)
I have the 18-105mm "Kit" lens as you call it and I find it does quite a good job myself. It is sluggish in low light, but at f3.5 on the big end it is not going to work in the dark. I use mine on a D3000, D80, D90 right now and find it very adequate as my walking around lens.
Aug 4, 2014 19:11:03 #
David Popham wrote:
From more than one source I have learned that the kit lens does not produce the best quality image. It has served me very well, but I am now prepared to "upgrade" to a new lens.
David
From more than one source I have learned that the kit lens does not produce the best quality image. It has served me very well, but I am now prepared to "upgrade" to a new lens.
David
Unless you just want to spend money and go into debt...then buy something.
Otherwise....only if YOU see a shortcoming of the lens should you consider replacing it.
Do YOU see something it can't do that you need it to?
Aug 4, 2014 19:20:18 #
David Popham wrote:
Three years ago I bought a Nikon D7000 body along ... (show quote)
When I bought my first Nikon, a D90, it came with the 18-105mm lens. When I upgraded to a D7000 I continued use the 18-105mm. I found it to be versatile, offering wide angle to mid range telephoto and gave good IQ. Are you unhappy with that lens or just suffering from G.A.S.?
Aug 4, 2014 19:55:01 #
I happened to be reading Rockwell's reviews of various Nikon lenses this past weekend. I'll paraphrase as I don't have the exact link handy, but he said something to the effect that all of Nikon's 18-xxx lenses are equally sharp and useful. You just need to decide the upper focal length of the zoom, the weight you're willing to carry and the price you want to spend.
Aug 5, 2014 06:20:22 #
I've had the Nikon 16-85mm AF-S DX lens for a few years. It's sharp, has great build quality, and well controlled distortion. The focus and zoom rings move precisely without any slop. It has three aspherical elements to combat aberrations such as chromatic aberration. Generally, kit lenses only have one asperical element.
Aug 5, 2014 07:00:00 #
sueyeisert
Loc: New Jersey
The Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 lens I would highly recommend.
jaygreen55 wrote:
The Nikon 16-85 sells for under 600 at B&H and is a very good lense that would complement your 70-300 vey well. The 17-55
F 2.8 is a pro level lens but insanely expensive at 1399 and has no VR
You might want to check out the Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4 macro which is also a good lens for 500. Both Sigma and Tamron have 17-50 F 2.8s
F 2.8 is a pro level lens but insanely expensive at 1399 and has no VR
You might want to check out the Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4 macro which is also a good lens for 500. Both Sigma and Tamron have 17-50 F 2.8s
Aug 5, 2014 07:39:59 #
sueyeisert wrote:
The Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 lens I would highly recommend.
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
I own the Tamron 17 - 50 mm (VC VERSION) and I'm very happy with it. Both tamron and sigma make great 3rd party lenses for a lot less money. Try rentals first to compare and see what you like. Www.borrowlenses.com is a good place to start. Good luck!
Aug 5, 2014 07:46:48 #
David Popham wrote:
Three years ago I bought a Nikon D7000 body along ... (show quote)
What focal length to you shoot at the most?
What type of photography do you do most? Portrait, wedding, macro, landscape...I could go on.
What is you budget?
Aug 5, 2014 08:40:41 #
David Popham wrote:
Three years ago I bought a Nikon D7000 body along ... (show quote)
It also depends on what FL you want to use with any new lens purchase. If you are happy with the 18-105 range, you may not be satisfied with something smaller. There are many fine lenses for the D7000 in the 16-85 or 17-50 FL that may be "better" than the 18-105 but you have to decide what you your needs are. When I had my D7000 I used a Tamron 17-50 non VC and found it to be an excellent lens. I was able to pick up a used nikon 28-105 and a Nikon 18-70, both terrific and very underrated. You may want to consider renting a lens before buying and this will allow you to see if it is want you want.
Aug 5, 2014 08:50:24 #
I'll go with CO on the 16-85 nikon, used it for many years and is a great walk about lens at a reasonable price. Good sharp photos
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.