Should I upgrade my kit lens?

C

Corduroy

New member
Hello.
This is my first post in these forums and I'd like some help.
I have a Nikon D3200 and the following lenses: 18-55 3.5-5.6 (the kit lens), 55-200 (3.5-5.6) and two primes 50 1.8 AF and 105 2.8 AF. The two primes are used only with MF in my camera.
I'm an amateur-enthusiast photographer, I love taking photos, but it's just a hobby.
Recently, I decided to upgrade my kit lens. It's not bad, I like many of my pictures with the kit lens but I just want to have better IQ and a faster lens.
I can't spend a huge amount of money and I was looking mainly for 3rd party lenses. Mainly Tamron and Sigma 17-50 and the Sigma 17-70C which is the one I decided to get.
Most of my pictures are near the wide range of my kit lens (18mm) for landscapes, but having a versatile lens like the 17-70 would help in other situations too (sometimes 55 was a bit short and by going with a 17-50 it would be even shorter).
Is the Sigma (or as a matter of fact any of the other lenses mentioned) a true upgrade to the kit lens? Are the differences noticeable in a D3200 and to someone with a not so professional eye like mine? Is it worth it to spend around 400+ for it or is the kit just fine?
Sorry for the long post, just tried to give all the info.
 
C

Corduroy

New member
Thanks for the link. Although I read many articles and reviews, I didn't find this one. So it seems that the lens I'm thinking of is one of the best choices I can make within my budget. Unfortunately, I'm not in a place where I can rent or test a lens easily. That's why I'm asking for the input of people that may have first hand experience of an "upgrade" like this.
 
C

Corduroy

New member
paul04 said:
Welcome to the website.

Following up on the link by Nikonpup, you can check the lens and camera combination.

In the search box, (search for a devce) just type in the name of the lens.

Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC MACRO OS HSM C Nikon mounted on Nikon D3200 : Tests and Reviews
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. The kit lens gets a score of 12 compared to 18 of the Sigma lens. I just don't know how these "lab" results convert in final results to a layman's eye. If this difference is apparent in an expert only or if a person like me would understand it. The best way would be like nikonpup said to test it somehow on my own. However this is not possible in my case.
 
S

salukfan111

Senior Member
Corduroy said:
Thanks for the info. The kit lens gets a score of 12 compared to 18 of the Sigma lens. I just don't know how these "lab" results convert in final results to a layman's eye. If this difference is apparent in an expert only or if a person like me would understand it. The best way would be like nikonpup said to test it somehow on my own. However this is not possible in my case.
Click to expand...
Go to flicker and compare. You want to look for micro contrast (renditional depth). If the ends of peoples noses look flat instead of rounded in the photos, then keep looking. If you're going to shoot a lot, then seriously think of trading in your camera for a D7xxx refurb when you see a bargain. The upgraded camera will allow you to use more, better, and cheaper lens because of the screw drive. You'd be shocked at what you save by buying pro screw drive glass on ebay.

Whether you keep the old or get a new camera, get a nikkor 24-85mm you won't be sorry.
EXC Nikon Nikkor G Ed If 24 85mm F 3 5 4 5 AF s SWM Ed G Lens from Japan KM412 018208022045 | eBay
 
Last edited:
A

aroy

Senior Member
You can also think of upgrading the D3200 and its kit lens to D3300 with the newer kit lens. The new kit lens is a tad sharper and the D3300 has no AA filter, so images are sharper.

As far as wides go, if you are shooting landscapes on a tripod, the older MF F2.8 wide primes are perfect as you will be stopping down for DOF.

I personally stitch frames for panorama, that gives me much better "coverage" of wide spaces. I have a 16-85, but prefer to use the kit 18-55 in general, with 3-5 stitches if the scene is really wide.
 
V

Vincent

Senior Member
Welcome

Corduroy said:
..I just want to have better IQ and a faster lens...
Click to expand...

I was wondering if your approach is delivering?
IQ of the 18-55 is already high, so is anything on a budget going to be better??
On speed you seem to not go a lot faster, max one stop (double the shutter speed at max opening)??

What about keeping the 18-55 for what you use it and add some lenses that can really reach the goal when needed: Nikon 35mm f1.8 DX and Sigma AF 70mm f2.8 EX DG.
 
C

Corduroy

New member
I'd like to thank all you for your input. You are very helpful.

salukfan111 said:
Go to flicker and compare. You want to look for micro contrast (renditional depth). If the ends of peoples noses look flat instead of rounded in the photos, then keep looking. If you're going to shoot a lot, then seriously think of trading in your camera for a D7xxx refurb when you see a bargain. The upgraded camera will allow you to use more, better, and cheaper lens because of the screw drive. You'd be shocked at what you save by buying pro screw drive glass on ebay.

Whether you keep the old or get a new camera, get a nikkor 24-85mm you won't be sorry.
EXC Nikon Nikkor G Ed If 24 85mm F 3 5 4 5 AF s SWM Ed G Lens from Japan KM412 018208022045 | eBay
Click to expand...

I've seen this lens and it could be very good, but I lose some range I use a lot (17-24mm). I've also thought about the 16-85.
The D7xx is a good solution though, one I've been thinking myself.

aroy said:
You can also think of upgrading the D3200 and its kit lens to D3300 with the newer kit lens. The new kit lens is a tad sharper and the D3300 has no AA filter, so images are sharper.

As far as wides go, if you are shooting landscapes on a tripod, the older MF F2.8 wide primes are perfect as you will be stopping down for DOF.

I personally stitch frames for panorama, that gives me much better "coverage" of wide spaces. I have a 16-85, but prefer to use the kit 18-55 in general, with 3-5 stitches if the scene is really wide.
Click to expand...

I don't believe the D3300 will make a big difference IMHO. As salukfan said, a transition to a D7xxx would be a better solution. I believe I should get at least a body that can use my primes with AF. The kit is a good lens, although it struggles indoors in my experience. I'm considering the Sigma because of better IQ (which as I said I'm not 100% positive I'll use), more reach and being faster.

mikew said:
Welcome to the forum
Click to expand...

Thanks.

Vincent said:
Welcome

I was wondering if your approach is delivering?
IQ of the 18-55 is already high, so is anything on a budget going to be better??
On speed you seem to not go a lot faster, max one stop (double the shutter speed at max opening)??

What about keeping the 18-55 for what you use it and add some lenses that can really reach the goal when needed: Nikon 35mm f1.8 DX and Sigma AF 70mm f2.8 EX DG.
Click to expand...

Honestly? I don't really know and that's why I opened this topic. I'm not sure myself if the difference would be significant to justify this "move".
However, I'm not a fan of adding two more primes. I find myself changing lenses more than I'd like and unfortunately I take many photos while moving, walking etc where I'd like a versatile lens. Moreover as I said, I tend to take many photos at the wider range. 35mm for example is not a length I find so much useful for my needs. The 70mm though could really help in many cases.
 
Last edited:
V

Vincent

Senior Member
Corduroy said:
Honestly? I don't really know and that's why I opened this topic.
Click to expand...

We all have this regularly. Will something help on the limitation I bump into?
Professionals need the best or have a particular style, which they can realise with their set of lenses.
The rest general does not need to change a lot. It seems a 24-70 f2.8 is more the lens you are aiming for, but the budget is not there, even with the Tamron. I have a Tamron 28-75 f2.8, not as sharp in the corners but very good in the middle. If you want the extra flexibility, keep the IQ, get more speed and keep the budget, you need to probably take risk going out of Nikon lenses; there are no real perfect solutions, you just need to find the compromises that work for your use.
 
C

Corduroy

New member
Vincent said:
We all have this regularly. Will something help on the limitation I bump into?
Professionals need the best or have a particular style, which they can realise with their set of lenses.
The rest general does not need to change a lot. It seems a 24-70 f2.8 is more the lens you are aiming for, but the budget is not there, even with the Tamron. I have a Tamron 28-75 f2.8, not as sharp in the corners but very good in the middle. If you want the extra flexibility, keep the IQ, get more speed and keep the budget, you need to probably take risk going out of Nikon lenses; there are no real perfect solutions, you just need to find the compromises that work for your use.
Click to expand...

The Tamron 24-70 is an excellent lens. My friend has it for his Pentax and the IQ is spectacular. I would consider getting one (albeit the price tag), but I think I'll miss the 18-24 range. I also believe that my needs don't need the best and that perfect solutions don't exist. That's why I'm not eager to upgrade. I could improve my technique for example. However there are instances where the kit lens is not sufficient (for example low-light) and the Sigma lens offers wider apertures.
Thanks again for the input.
 
Top