Next logical lens for beginner

[BackdoorArts]

After 3 years of use, abuse and travel I've had zero issues with my 18-105mm. "Flimsy" is one word that would never come to mind, and I would suspect that focus hunting has as much to do with the body it's on and how it's being used as anything else. As with anything, YMMV.

 

[Eob]

I agree that its kinda nutty to just start picking out lenses before I have a specialty, but I need to pick something now for a christmas gift. I like to try a bit of everything, anyway. My main subject interests are animals, my own and at zoos and parks. I like to take pictures around Chicago, and some of the surrounding small towns and parks. I've really been enjoying taking pictures of my nieces and nephews. They are fast, so thats something that I need to work on. I just got a new camera protecting purse, so I will be taking it around with me a lot more than I used to, so who knows what I might start capturing.

I took a day long dslr class, and the instructor recommended a lens that was much better than the kit lens, with a lower fstop that wasn't expensive. I lost my notes maybe that was the 18-105? I still like the idea of the 40mm 2.8. I read some reviews and watched a video. I have taken a lot of up close flower shots where I got a ton of detail. I'm not sure if I need more. Here are some examples of pics that I've taken with the d3100

 

[nickt]

The 18-105 is also a kit lens with some Nikon models, but for many people, it is a more desirable kit lens than the 18-55.

 

[ShootRaw]

I think you would really enjoy the 40mm 2.8 ....Would be a great walk around lens and double as a macro..

 

[DraganDL]

Here is a nice, very informative review of two probably most popular modern Nikon kit-lenses: http://goo.gl/4Pdywo

"The Nikon 18-55mm VR
It doesn’t do everything, this one. Zoom range is limited, there is no instant focus override. It is a simple, light, cheap lens with vibration reduction. Doesn’t promise you the world. But it does what it does very well. It is a brilliant little lens.
The Nikon 18-105mm VR
This one promises a bit more. Double the zoom range. Instant focus override. Looks a bit more serious as well. In the end: the niggles take a lot of the fun away from this lens. On paper, this is a much better lens, shame that it doesn’t work as well in the real world.

So, which one am I keeping?

Despite the 18-105 having double the zoom range, I always find myself using the 18-55VR. As I said, it is a lot more fun"

Like I wrote in my previous post, there is a problem with the built of a 18-105, in terms of that rubber isolation laying between inner tube (barrel that contains the glass elements) and the outer barrel tends to "crawl out" of it's place, so to speak - I saw with my own eyes two such lenses in just a couple of months. Both lenses were (are) brand new ones, purchased with the brand new cameras.
Here is a bunch of people complaining of the 18-105's bayonet being too prone to breaking, which is not so common with other plasticky lenses (though is possible, of course): http://goo.gl/z4sNlG

 

[Horoscope Fish]

The Nikon 18-105mm all but LIVES on my D7100. While it's not the fastest lens I own, nor the sharpest, it does so much and does it so well this is the lens I need a reason to switch away from. Right behind it are my Nikon 85mm f/1.8G and the 35mm f/1.8G. The 18-55mm is a very capable lens, no doubt. I'd use one without reservation in a heartbeat, but the 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6 is my constant companion. It's a real workhorse of a lens.

.....

 

[DraganDL]

That's beautiful. I just wanted to warn our colleague about so many people experiencing problems with this lens. It does not mean that there aren't many others, who are pleased with the very same model...

 

[Eob]

Thanks for the tips, everyone! It sounds like I will want the 18-105 and the 40mm eventually. I'm leaning toward the 40mm because it does something different, since I have the 18-55 kit lens and the 55-300. As I improve, I would be willing to spend more on lenses. Is there a lens similar to the 18-105 thats better/more expensive that I will want later, or is that the one that you prefer?

 

[DraganDL]

So, you DO have a 18-55 then? I think I misunderstood you - I was convinced that you do not have that lens...
If you have some spare $$$, you could consider selling your 18-55mm and buying a 16-85mm, which would be also a perfect companion to your 55-300mm... Nikon 16-85mm Review

 

[RockyNH_RIP]

I am another one who has an 18-105 live on my 7100!! I used it for a week and then sold my 18-55!
That is NOT a knock on the 18-55, just the extra range with the 105 I would not be using it....

No issues with mine at all...

Pat in NH

 

[Eob]

Sorry for the confusion, I didn't think 3100s were sold without the kit lens. I would probably keep it anyway, in case I break something else, which for me seems pretty probable. How much is it worth used?

 

[Horoscope Fish]

Thanks for the tips, everyone! It sounds like I will want the 18-105 and the 40mm eventually. I'm leaning toward the 40mm because it does something different, since I have the 18-55 kit lens and the 55-300. As I improve, I would be willing to spend more on lenses. Is there a lens similar to the 18-105 thats better/more expensive that I will want later, or is that the one that you prefer?

Nikon recently released the 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6 but it costs considerably more than the 18-105mm (read: it's a $600 lens that gives you an additional 35mm of focal length). We can all do the math and thusly determine if the price difference is justified or not in our own mind, so I'll leave that to you.

Personally I would be happy with either. The 18-105/140 would be my day-to-day, walkabout lens regardless and if I needed a "Big Gun" I'd have a 70-300mm to reach for.

.....

 

[DraganDL]

"How much is it worth used?"
​
You mean the 18-55mm VR? Well, here in Serbia it goes for ~ 50$, freshly purchased as a kit, on the "grey" market (people privately selling their personal goods). In stores, it goes for about a 100$, all taxes included...

 

[Eob]

Nikon recently released the 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6 but it costs considerably more than the 18-105mm (read: it's a $600 lens that gives you an additional 35mm of focal length). We can all do the math and thusly determine if the price difference is justified or not in our own mind, so I'll leave that to you. Personally I would be happy with either. The 18-105/140 would be my day-to-day, walkabout lens regardless and if I needed a "Big Gun" I'd have a 70-300mm to reach for. .....

Makes sense! Thanks

 

[Lawrence]

As a result of this thread I have pulled the trigger on a 18-105 which was available locally.

I am now seriously considering the Nikon AF-S 70 - 300 VR refurbished from Adorama. Far too early for me really but I think I know where my interests (and my arthritis and inflexibility) are taking me plus I have a mule coming out from USA in just over 2 weeks who could bring it for me. No warranty but it only comes with 90 days anyway. Local ones not available and when they are seem so much more expensive.

 

[DraganDL]

Nikon AF-S 70 - 300 VR is a good lens. I noticed a kind of significant degree of wobbling of the inner tube, on the one I held in my hands (one of my colleagues owns it), but the results I saw convinced me that it does not matter. While I had had only a 24-120mm, I used to think of purchasing this telephoto zoom - some guy is bringing them from Thailand to Belgrade, and selling them for less than 500$. But, then I stumbled upon an used, old school AF-D 80-200mm and purchased it for a pocket money - 50$. It has no VR and I am using it in a manual focus mode (no motorized body for the time being), but it serves...

 

[solberg2004]

Hi all. I have a D3100 just over a year now with the 18-55mm VR & 55-200mm VR lenses. I am looking at adding another lens to my kit.
There is two i am looking at: AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G and the AF-S DX Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G.
I am looking for advice on which of the two is the best to go for. Ideally i want a lens for portrait and still shots and being able to define sharpness and blurred effect backround into my photos.

 

[BackdoorArts]

That's beautiful. I just wanted to warn our colleague about so many people experiencing problems with this lens. It does not mean that there aren't many others, who are pleased with the very same model...

If "so many people" are having problems, how is it that this is the first time I've heard about it after almost 2 years at this forum? I get it, you have a favorite, but don't go slamming another recommendation without some kind of empirical evidence. The closest anything has gotten to "so many people" in my two years here is the D600 issue, and even then we have more people who never experienced it than did.

 

[ShootRaw]

Hi all. I have a D3100 just over a year now with the 18-55mm VR & 55-200mm VR lenses. I am looking at adding another lens to my kit.
There is two i am looking at: AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G and the AF-S DX Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G.
I am looking for advice on which of the two is the best to go for. Ideally i want a lens for portrait and still shots and being able to define sharpness and blurred effect backround into my photos.

50mm 1.8g for portraits..

 

[DraganDL]

Hi all. I have a D3100 just over a year now with the 18-55mm VR & 55-200mm VR lenses. I am looking at adding another lens to my kit.
There is two i am looking at: AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G and the AF-S DX Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G.
I am looking for advice on which of the two is the best to go for. Ideally i want a lens for portrait and still shots and being able to define sharpness and blurred effect backround into my photos.

+1 for 50mm. Though, this lens is not limited by being a "DX lens" - it covers full frames too (which is only a plus). If you meant this one: http://goo.gl/OC0a8