A good all round lens for the D7100

Can anyone recommend a good all round lens for the D7100.

At the moment I have a Nikon 50mm F1.8, Nikon 55-200 f4-5.6, Nikon 18-55mm f3.5-5.6, and a tamron 70-300mm f4-5.6

I use the 50mm 70% of the time, and a pick of the others the rest of the time. I've not really got a theme to shoot, just take a picture of what I see.

I was looking at something like a 18-105mm or 18-140mm or 18-200mm

budget is around £200 or $300, I could sell a couple of lenses to push the budget up a little.

I have a 18-140, and for the price, it can't be beat.....clear, crisp shots!

I have a D7100 and my 18-140 stays on the camera most of the time. A good walk-around lens.

I have a 70-300 and 11-16 also.

I use an 18-105 as the general "vacation lens" on my D7100. It does a terrific job.

18-140 on my 7100, plus I always keep my Tokina 11-16 in my pocket.

I have the Tamron 18-270. Which I use a lot as my walk around lens.

Thank you for the replies, I will see what prices I can get for the lenses recommended.

Nikon 18-300 newish lens and really good clarity. Read the reviews, but it's a useful all-rounder


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I used to love my Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G on a DX frame. Fantastic walkabout lens, should be able to pick up a second-hander up at about £250. That 16mm makes such a big difference over the 18mm imo.
Used Nikon Lenses | Second Hand Nikon Lenses | 2nd Hand Nikon

I have the Nikon 18-105mm kit lens. It's underrated, possibly because it's a kit lens. But I get excellent results with it and I use it a lot more than I thought I would. It's a great lens.

I agree with the opinions about the 18-140. I really like the results I get with mine.

hi,
i can vouch for the 18-105. had it as the kit lens on my D7K. now I have the nikon 18-200 which is a fantastic range for a general lens for DX. Be careful of the new Sigma 18-200 contemporary lens. beautiful lens, but compatibility issues with the D7100.
never shot with the 18-140 but I can well imagine this would be great as a walkabout.

I have the Nikon 16-85, but am seriously giving some thought about the 18-140. I like the extra Tele but don't know if I can give up the 2mm of wide as I do use the 16 often. Especially indoor.

Tamron 16-300 is interesting but I rarely need 200 left alone 300.

I thought about the switch also but was not able to give up those extra 2mm at the wide end. So picked up a 70-210 to go longer. tokina had a 16.5-135 which intrigued me but it got bad reviews.

I just sold my 18-140 I found going over 100 mm to be very lacking in IQ and bought a 16-85, I really don't like 18-anything, it's nice to have the extra mm's 16mm to short tele.

I have researched this issue long and hard and have come to the conclusion that the 16-85 is the best medium length zoom for dx cameras. The 16mm is wide enough for almost anything inside or outside and the 85mm length gives you an ideal portrait length. Could it be faster? Yes, but with the ISO reach of the 7000 series cameras, lens speed is just not a factor.

Looks like a unanimous vote for the 16-85. I'll give up trying the 18-140 and instead save money towards a 70-300 VR or a 70-200 f4 for when I need a "proper" Tele

An all in one lense is fine for occasional use; especially for traveling light; but the IQ is not all that great. I have fund that most of the inexpensive zooms are soft at the long end, hence not worth using.

At present I use the 16-85 when I need the 85mm, else the kit 18-55. My 70-300 AF is very soft after 200mm, hence not used at all. In future I will go for a prime. The 300mm F4 AFS will be my next purchase.

SpikeyLemon said:

Looks like a unanimous vote for the 16-85. I'll give up trying the 18-140 and instead save money towards a 70-300 VR or a 70-200 f4 for when I need a "proper" Tele

Click to expand...

Avoid the 70-300, the 70-200 is a much sharper lens, just use 200 and crop, it will be sharper than 300 of the 70-300. The best bet is still the (now) older 300mm F4, it is way ahead of most zooms at 300mm.

SpikeyLemon said:

Looks like a unanimous vote for the 16-85. I'll give up trying the 18-140 and instead save money towards a 70-300 VR or a 70-200 f4 for when I need a "proper" Tele

Click to expand...

Well, maybe not quite unanimous. But until you physically compare 18mm vs 16mm, you'll not understand the difference it makes. 2mm? not alot is it right? I mean, the difference between 400mm and 500mm isn't astoundingly as massively huge as it sounds. But really, that 2mm, makes a difference.
I think you're going down the right road with a two lens system, rather than the jack of all trades, master of none single lens system. I'm not an incredibly big fan of the 70-300mm, but many swear by it.