Best Everyday lens

[iamntxhunter]

Do you feel you need VR on such a short zoom?

I have the Sigma 17-50 and I actually like the fact that it has it, in really low light it does help some.

 

[nikonpup]

every day lens on a budget 18-105mm. If budget allows the new 18-140mm.

 

[kamaccord]

I have the Sigma 17-50 and I actually like the fact that it has it, in really low light it does help some.

I too have the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8. I find this lens extremely sharp,accurate, and very fast focusing. The image stabilization is awesome and has allowed me to get sharp images handheld at very low shutter speeds. This lens exceeds the performance of my Nikkor 18-105 with respect to image quality right out of my camera. I highly recommended this lens. I wish I had compared it with the Nikkor 17-55 f2.8 which was my first consideration.

 

[ryanwphoto]

Do you feel you need VR on such a short zoom?

Yes sometimes, when compared to my old 18-105 kit lens I could use slower shutter speeds partly because it had VR and was quite a bit lighter even with a smaller aperture of 3.5-5.6

Sent from my HTC One S using Tapatalk

 

[Pebbleheed]

Yes sometimes, when compared to my old 18-105 kit lens I could use slower shutter speeds partly because it had VR and was quite a bit lighter even with a smaller aperture of 3.5-5.6

Sent from my HTC One S using Tapatalk

Understandable on a longer zoom, but up to 50mm I've never experienced a need for it myself on my 17-50 f/2.8 tamron lens.

I have it on my 70-300 lens for the longer shots.

 

[ryanwphoto]

For crazy sharpness, beautiful color and lightweightness (if that's even a word) I absolutely LOVE using my 50mm f1.8G lens. And for $200 wow, can't be beat!

Sent from my HTC One S using Tapatalk

 

[SpikeyLemon]

I loved my Nikon 16-85, I recently bought the non-VC Tamron 17-50 2.8. Loved it also. I didn't miss the extra reach on the 16-85 as much as I thought I would, due to the 1.3x crop mode on the D7100 and the high mega pixel that I can just centre crop anything. The Tamron is my current go-to lens.

 

[str8rcn]

I use my 18-140 all the time.....rarely put the 55-300 on. I do once in a while use the 50mm.

Same here. I've only taken the 18-140 off once to use my 35mm.

 

[Patrick M]

Since getting that 18-55 VRII a month ago, I have to say it's the only lens I've used since, and I've shot over a thousand pics. Indoors, with/without flash, outdoors, landscapes, close ups. Where the shots were rubbish was down to me :-(
This is a really great little lens.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk 2

 

[djbxtreme]

tried shots on the Sigma 18-35 1.8, Brilliant would be an understatement.
I did try the Nikon 17-55 2.8 multiple times and the Tamron 17-50 2.8. The nikon is a winner and pro. But damn expensive. Tamron was so-so
Sigma - can't beat that 1.8, esp for indoors and night photography - esp without flash. The zoom is a little silly. I also use a 50mm 1.4. So I guess its not too bad to get this one for now.
For the price of Nikon, I can buy the Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 and Tokina 11-16mm 2.8.

Thank you all for the suggestions and tips. You guys are the best.

 

[ryanwphoto]

I have the Nikon 17-55 now and I really like it, super sharp and built like a tank. I find that it has chromatic stuff going on at 2.8 but not as much as my 50 at 1.8. Shot with it out in the pouring rain on my d7000, no protection and its still works great! Wish it had VR though. I picked up a used one for $700. Too expensive to buy new.

Sent from my HTC One S using Tapatalk

 

[djbxtreme]

I like the 17-55. Terrific lens. Put in lot of thought while getting the Sigma 18-35.
The extra zoom is truly an advantage, but the 1.8 on the Sigma nails it for low light situations. Love the color sense on it as well.

Got the Nikon 50mm 1.4 - so that might help me - but yes, need to walk around with couple of lenses.

Thinking of getting 70-300 as well. Nikon or Tamron.

 

[ryanwphoto]

I've got the Nikon 70-300. It's a good lens at a good price. Not near the quality of the 17-55!

Sent from my HTC One S using Tapatalk

 

[djbxtreme]

yes, Need the 70-300 as a zoom lens.
It's a heavy bag now, with 3 lenses already.

 

[ryanwphoto]

yes, Need the 70-300 as a zoom lens.
It's a heavy bag now, with 3 lenses already.

Oh I know, it almost makes me want to switch to mirrorless! I bought a Lowepro Transit Backpack 350 AW and it helps a bit. I'm on a trip in British Columbia, Canada right now and I'm carrying a D7000, 50mm 1.8, 17-55mm, 70-300mm, sb-600 flash, and quite a few filters. Oh and a tripod! (I think my next camera with be a Fujifilm x-t1 or something similar)

Sent from my HTC One S using Tapatalk

 

[Pebbleheed]

I came from mirrorless to dslr. For me the extra weight it worth it

 

[ryanwphoto]

I came from mirrorless to dslr. For me the extra weight it worth it

Please expand on that.... I've never used a mirrorless system before. I guess it all depends on what brand you choose?

Sent from my HTC One S using Tapatalk

 

[Pebbleheed]

I had a Panasonic. Had several lenses and started off relatively happy with the size as my first interchangeable lens camera.

After having a quick play with a mates APSC dslr however I realised what I was missing out on. To me an LCD or evf isn't a patch on a proper view finder. I also found I had better control of depth of field and got more control over my shots with a dslr over a mirrorless.

If I could afford it I'd have a mirrorless camera as a backup with a pancake lens. It would be ideal for street photography. But I wouldn't ever go back to one as my main camera.