Nikkor 18-140 question

sl60

Senior Member
I'm still using my D70s (and I would appreciate any reasons to upgrade) with the 28-105 kit lens. I'm an amateur, but very interested in upgrading my skills. Would it be worth the money to buy the 18-140 lens? Or perhaps a refurbished one? I guess what I want to know is, is the 18-140 significantly better than the 28-105?

Thanks!
 

Blacktop

Senior Member
I'm still using my D70s (and I would appreciate any reasons to upgrade) with the 28-105 kit lens. I'm an amateur, but very interested in upgrading my skills. Would it be worth the money to buy the 18-140 lens? Or perhaps a refurbished one? I guess what I want to know is, is the 18-140 significantly better than the 28-105?

Thanks!

The 28-105 is an FX -D lens. I have one and it's a nice lens. The 18-140 is a DX lens. If you upgrade in the future to an FX camera you won't want to use it on it.
Having said all this, and have used both of these lenses, I would prefer the 18-140mm lens if I was shooting DX.
 

Fred Kingston

Senior Member
What does "significantly better mean"?? Other than being different focal lengths, and the differences between an FX and a DX lens... The performance on that camera will not be "significantly better"...

A "significantly better" option would be to upgrade that camera... That camera is a 6MP, 12 year old camera...
 

sl60

Senior Member
By "significantly better" I mean this: you can give a master guitarist a $100 guitar and a $5K guitar and while he/she can produce the same notes on each, the more expensive instrument will sound infinitely better. I would assume it would be the same with a kit lens versus a professional lens. So my question is, is the 18-140 significantly better enough to warrant the cost?
 

Fred Kingston

Senior Member
There are two parts to your equation. The camera and the lens. Using your violin analogy, putting the 18-140 on that body is the same as putting the Stradivarius in the hands of a child and expecting a great sound. The violin is capable but the child isn't. The lens is a better lens, but you won't realize that difference putting it on a 6MP camera...
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
I have to agree with Fred.

Further, the Nikon 28-105mm is a *very* capable lens that shoots with remarkably low levels of distortion across its entire focal-length. I can't compare it to the 18-140mm but I'd be curious to see how well that lens shot on a higher-resolution body; a D5300 for instance if you want to stay with the DX format. I'm betting it would really "sing". Not too cross with previous metaphors...
 

Blacktop

Senior Member
By "significantly better" I mean this: you can give a master guitarist a $100 guitar and a $5K guitar and while he/she can produce the same notes on each, the more expensive instrument will sound infinitely better. I would assume it would be the same with a kit lens versus a professional lens. So my question is, is the 18-140 significantly better enough to warrant the cost?

This analogy it is not correct. These two lenses are different. It's like comparing a Strat to a Tele. They both have a distinct sound. It does not make one better then the other, just different.

I have found that when shooting objects in close (ie..flowers or things of this nature) the 28-105 is sharper. However the bokeh on the 18-140 is much nicer and more pleasing.
Shooting landscapes, the 18-140 won hands down on my D7100.

The 28-105 is also a Macro lens. Although it only has 1:2 magnification it makes a very nice macro lens in a pinch. Very sharp.

Once again. Overall, if I was shooting a DX camera and needed a walkaround lens, I would pickup an 18-140.
 

sl60

Senior Member
My point was that there's a major gulf between, say, a low-end Fender Squier and 3K Strat, and I wondered if such a gulf exists between the two lenses. But it seems like all are saying that either lens would produce better results with an upgraded body.
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
What do you think of the D5300 vs the 5500 vs the 7100?
I think it depends on your budget and what features you find important or useful and are willing to pay for. Between the D5300 and D5500 there's not much to talk about besides the touch-screen. Getting into the 7' series bodies is a little bigger jump, however. Now you're adding an Auto-focus motor and lot of external controls at a minimum so it's little bit meatier conversation. But IQ-wise, between all three bodies and assuming all other things being equal? I think anyone would be hard-pressed to say which body took any particular shot with consistent accuracy.
 
Last edited:

sl60

Senior Member
Budget is always a consideration! I don't particularly care about the touchscreen. I do have an interest in lower-light situations, such as forest interiors, if that makes a difference, but no portraits or action shots.
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
Budget is always a consideration! I don't particularly care about the touchscreen. I do have an interest in lower-light situations, such as forest interiors, if that makes a difference, but no portraits or action shots.
Tough call between the D5300 and the D7100. Neither have an OLPF (which is a very good thing) and both have very good AF-systems though the D7100 is the clear winner when it comes to focusing in low-light. The D5300 holds it own here, but the D7100 is clearly better at it. The SNR is identical between the two sensors but the D7100 has a little bit higher dynamic range at high ISO, which translates into better color retention and lower shadow noise. Still, I think you'd have a hard time determining which camera took the shot, all things being equal and if you shoot raw good post-processing can be a big equalizer.

My girlfriend shoots with a D5300 and when I shoot DX it's with a D7100 so I've seen plenty of work done with both bodies under identical situations. The D5300 never ceases to amaze me; I call it Nikon's "wolf in sheep's clothing". That being said, I do get frustrated with the lack of external controls on the D5300 when compared to my D7100 and if you want to be able to shoot the often less expensive Nikon "D" glass, the D7100 has a focus motor so you won't lose AF when using those lenses. If "D" variant glass isn't a big deal to you, the absence of a AF-motor probably isn't either. Decisions, decisions!
.....
 
Top