New D7100 Owner w/ Lens Questions

After owning a D40 since I believe 2008, I've decided to buy a new body and purchased a D7100 yesterday. After salivating over it at Best Buy for the past few weeks, and countless hours looking at it online, I decided it was time to end the obsession and just get it. Roberts Camera had them refurbished on eBay for $599, which seems like a steal for this body - and all the reviews I can find about refurbished Nikon gear are overwhelmingly positive so I pulled the trigger.

I'm just a hobbyist photographer, but the bug for some gear upgrades came a few weeks ago when my cousin got in a bind. His wedding photographer wasn't coming to the reception (Photographer options in the UP aren't big I guess) and I was their next best option with my D40 and a hand full of inexpensive glass. With my D40, SB-600, and my AF-S 35mm 1.8, I managed to get enough shots to give them enough keepers to have some memories of their event. Believe me, I have no illusions of becoming any type of wedding photographer after shooting one event as a default option and getting some keepers - but I did have a blast and I did find out some limitations of my equipment.

One of the big limitations I found was in doing crops - 6MP just isn't enough and there were a few shots I wanted to crop but just lost too much information. Also, I'd like to be able to buy some older non AF-S lenses to maybe save some coin over their modern counterparts. Plus I've always been a fan of HDR photography and the D40 doesn't bracket.

My first question is about the lenses I already have. Since I got the 35mm 1.8, that pretty much lives on my D40. However, there are times I'd like to use the 18-55 that came with the D40 for a walk-around zoom. Is the 24MP sensor on this camera going to show the limitations of this lens, or should it be "OK" for a while until I can get a nicer zoom?

Speaking of nicer zooms - I've had my eye on one of the midrange f/2.8 zooms - either the 17-55 or the 24-70. Are the older non AF-S versions of the 24-70 decent? I believe I've seen those go for a decent price on eBay, and with the 7100 having the AF drive motor in the camera I might be able to save some coin that way instead of getting the AF-S version.

I'm sure I'll have a few more questions after I get the D7100 in my hands...

Welcome to the website.

The 18-55mm lens will be fine on your D7100, until you decide on which lens to get next.

3 lens which are popular for the D7100 are the 16-85mm, 18-105mm and the 18-140mm.

Have a read here.
http://nikonites.com/d7100/33044-picking-good-glass-d7100.html#axzz3ncRMGLbI

DonnieZ said:

My first question is about the lenses I already have. Since I got the 35mm 1.8, that pretty much lives on my D40. However, there are times I'd like to use the 18-55 that came with the D40 for a walk-around zoom. Is the 24MP sensor on this camera going to show the limitations of this lens, or should it be "OK" for a while until I can get a nicer zoom?

Click to expand...

24 megapixels will always be better than 6 megapixels, never worse. Also the newer sensor dynamic range improvements should be very noticeable.

DonnieZ said:

Speaking of nicer zooms - I've had my eye on one of the midrange f/2.8 zooms - either the 17-55 or the 24-70. Are the older non AF-S versions of the 24-70 decent? I believe I've seen those go for a decent price on eBay, and with the 7100 having the AF drive motor in the camera I might be able to save some coin that way instead of getting the AF-S version.

Click to expand...

The predecessor to AF-S 24-70/2.8 in Nikon lineup was AF-S 28-70/2.8. Prior to that the midrange pro zoom was AF 35-70/2.8. This one is a push-pull zoom, unlike the current twist-zoom lenses. All of these are optically good, but the newer ones are naturally better. None of these is really a wide angle on a DX sensor.

How about the new Nikkor 16-80/2.8~4 (did I recall that correctly?). It is f/2.8 at the wide and and seems to get good reviews.

The rest of this post is just personal observations and opinions, feel free to disregard
I never liked the Nikkor 17-55/2.8. It is well built but the image quality wasn't really that convincing to me. Sad to say, but I think there are third party f/2.8 DX-crop lenses for this focal range, that deliver much higher image quality, at lower price. At least take a look at Tamron 17-50, Sigma 17-50 and Tokina 16-50. I have never used any of these, but they seem to be well liked. I had the Nikkor AF-S DX 17-55/2.8 but swapped that for a Nikkor AF-S 17-35/2.8 full frame wide angle. It worked well as a normal zoom for DX and even better as a wide angle for FX.

Your post emulates my DSLR experience. Upgraded from a D40 the first year they came out to a refurb D7100 from Roberts Camera

Great upgrade for sure, as a hobbyist it will take years to out grow that camera.

I use the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 non-VC on my D7100 frequently. I've had it about a year and bought it for about $270 used on ebay last fall. Great all around lens and the f2.8 throughout doesn't suck

Hello and welcome

If you can afford a 17-55 2.8, don't waste money on 18-55's or 18-105's, get the 17-55 2.8 (25-82) or maybe the new 16-80E gives you a (24-120) in FF they are great lenses. I don't recommend FX glass (24-70) unless you are sure your going to upgrade to FF sometime soon.

Thanks for the welcomes and advice. Seems there's a lot of love for the 17-55. As I've been doing some research, the Sigma and Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 seems to get some good reviews as well. The Nikon obviously gets really good reviews, however it comes at a price. If I did go for the Nikon lens, I'd try and purchase a solid used copy vs. a new one at twice (or more) the price.

I really like the idea of a fixed, fast lens across the zoom range - seems it would be great for shooting portraits and indoor shots with ambient light.

DonnieZ said:

Thanks for the welcomes and advice. Seems there's a lot of love for the 17-55. As I've been doing some research, the Sigma and Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 seems to get some good reviews as well. The Nikon obviously gets really good reviews, however it comes at a price. If I did go for the Nikon lens, I'd try and purchase a solid used copy vs. a new one at twice (or more) the price.

I really like the idea of a fixed, fast lens across the zoom range - seems it would be great for shooting portraits and indoor shots with ambient light.

Click to expand...

The Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM is an excellent lens.
...

I use the 18-55 on my D7100 all the time (had it from my D3100 kit), and to be honest, I'm not sure why people refer to the "limitations" of the lens so often. It's a fantastic lens, for a non-fixed aperture lens, and it allows me to get much closer to subjects than most of the other non-macro lenses out on the market, and still maintain focus... and I've been known to heavily crop pics shot with that lens without a worry at all.

Best answer, though - You have the lens, so shoot it! If it worked well for you on the D40, I'm betting it will work just as well or better on the D7100. You're going to be the one that decides whether or not it's working well or "limited" by getting some real world examples. The 17-55 is a workhorse for that focal range, too, or so I've heard, and a lot of folks love the "limited" (TIC) 18-140.

Welcome to the forums, btw. Looking forward to seeing your pics!

Pretzel said:

I use the 18-55 on my D7100 all the time (had it from my D3100 kit), and to be honest, I'm not sure why people refer to the "limitations" of the lens so often. It's a fantastic lens, for a non-fixed aperture lens, and it allows me to get much closer to subjects than most of the other non-macro lenses out on the market, and still maintain focus... and I've been known to heavily crop pics shot with that lens without a worry at all.

Best answer, though - You have the lens, so shoot it! If it worked well for you on the D40, I'm betting it will work just as well or better on the D7100.

Click to expand...

I use a Nikkor 18-55 VR and the sister kit lens 55-200 VR on D300 a lot. Not a fan of the plastic mount but hard to argue with the image quality and the easy carry weight of the two cheap bits of kit.

Frankly, as I have said many times on the forums, I am shocked at how usable they truly are. Use your kit glass and save your money while you learn your new camera = I'm guessing you'll opt for a couple fast primes vs. upgrading the kit zoom.

In my experience the Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR is a fine lens... Until you compare it to something else. It's not particularly fast, sharp or contrast-y. Wide open it's soft in the corners and it distorts rather badly. Chromatic aberration is evident across the board. Yes, it's certainly possible to get good shots with the 18-55 f/3.5-5.6G VR but other lenses, such as the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8, will crush it at every turn, and do it every day of the week and twice on Sunday. The later versions are better with the latest, VRII version, being a relatively decent lens.
....