Suggestion for general lens

T

Tyler

Senior Member
Apologies if this has been covered. However I just picked up a 7100 and was going to just buy the kit 18-105 lens but have been sorta talking my self out of it. It is now out of stock at cameta as a refurb. So I have been looking at other options and would like anyone's opinion or suggestions towards something else. I want to keep it below 500

I'm really considering the tamron 17-50 2.8 vc. But I have heard a lot of mixed reviews. Also considering the nikon 16-85. However I want the 2.8 so it will perform well in low light. I am very undecided as of now and my D7100 should ship out tomorrow.

Right now I have my 3100 with both kit lenses (18-55 & 55-200) and a Nikon 50mm 1.8g. I plan on later getting the tamron 70-200 2.8 vc as my good telephoto.

Like I had said does anyone have any opinions or alternative lenses I could look into? Thanks!
 
D

Don Kuykendall_RIP

RIP :(
I have the 18-105 and I can tell you that is a really nice walk about lens. I have the 18-55 and it just does not give me what I want and I have the 55-200 and it is just a little to long for everyday. The 18-105 just works. Many times I just go shooting with nothing in particular in mind and I really do not want to carry my backpack with me so it is one lens at the time for me.
 
M

mustang

Senior Member
pssst ............ use the two kit lenses for now ,they will be ok
save your $$$ till you can afford a 17-55 2.8 refurb from cameta .................it's worth the wait .
if you have 500 now to spend you are halfway there , seriously get the nikon 17-55 dx
 
Horoscope Fish

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
Don Kuykendall said:
I have the 18-105 and I can tell you that is a really nice walk about lens. I have the 18-55 and it just does not give me what I want and I have the 55-200 and it is just a little to long for everyday. The 18-105 just works. Many times I just go shooting with nothing in particular in mind and I really do not want to carry my backpack with me so it is one lens at the time for me.
Click to expand...

I agree... I love my 18-105mm for all the reasons mentioned above. It's your Jack-of-all-Trades sort of lens but I say that without taking anything away from the Sigma 17-55mm f/2.8 which *is* a nifty little lens. It's just that I would find it a little short on focal length for a general "grab-and-go".

The Nikon 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6 would a good substitute, but Nikon wants a lot of scratch for the extra 35mm of focal length. Still, if I had my druthers...

.....
 
Last edited:
C

captain birdseye

Senior Member
i was recently looking for a good quality walkabout lens. i considered the nikon 16-85 and various 3rd party options and could not find a truly portable jack of all trades solution so i opted for the ultimate (to me) walkabout camera instead.the sony rx10 stood out among the competition and i have not regretted it. 24-200mm (35mm equivalent), f2.8. reasonably compact with excellent video. it certainly beats changing lenses!for around the price of the nikon 17-55 it seems like a no brainer.
 
Last edited:
E

Englischdude

Senior Member
i personally like primes, the lens which is on my D7000 most of the time is my nifty 50mm 1.8D . This is such a versatile lens thanks to it's convenient focal length on a crop sensor and the low-light capabilities, light and cheap, so I dont need to skip a hearbeat everytime a drop of rain falls on it. I also use the 18-105 and the "all but forgotten" 28-85 AFD (check out my thread on this one under general lenses). Good luck with this enquiry, you're gonna get a gzillion different answers ;)
 
§

§am

Senior Member
How about the Nikon AF 24-85mm f/2.8-4

Not sure how much you can pick a used/second hand/nearly new etc out there for, but it might cover your needs for a decent focal range.

Sigma do a 17-70mm f/2.8-4 as well for less $'s or even the Tokina 16-50mm f/2.8
 
G

gqtuazon

Gear Head
§am said:
How about the Nikon AF 24-85mm f/2.8-4

Not sure how much you can pick a used/second hand/nearly new etc out there for, but it might cover your needs for a decent focal range.
Click to expand...

I saw a fairly new Nikon 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 VR lens. I don't have any first hand experience with this lens but I am entertaining in getting a used one for $300. I'm not sure if it is worth getting or just skip it? I thought it might be a good walk-around lens during the day with good light.

Edit: Sorry Sam. I didn't realize that you were describing the older f2.8-4 lens.
 
Last edited:
I

iamntxhunter

Senior Member
T

Tyler

Senior Member
Thanks for all the responses. A friend of mine who is a professional photographer said sigma was not very good. But everything else I have heard is good.

I plan on using the lens as a walk around/go to/always on my camera lens. If that makes sense haha I want the nikkor 17-55 2.8 but I don't know if I can justify spending that much money on a dx lens if I one day decide to go fx. That's why I'm looking to be around 500. I could go even cheaper and get a tamron 17-50 2.8 non vc as it is sharper and if I want to get a slow shutter speed I could just throw it on a tripod.
 
§

§am

Senior Member
Tyler said:
A friend of mine who is a professional photographer said sigma was not very good.
Click to expand...

That will depend on what lens he was talking about - there are plenty of great Sigma lenses out there, otherwise their lend business model would be down the drain by now.
As an example, look at the 18-35mm f/1.8 lens - nothing like it in it's class, and the reviews for it are great.
The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 also a very good lens - some say better than the Nikon equivalent.

It's also a lot about perspective and personal choice too - some people will point blank refuse to buy or endorse anything other than a Nikon :)
 
T

TonyD315

Senior Member
mustang said:
pssst ............ use the two kit lenses for now ,they will be ok
save your $$$ till you can afford a 17-55 2.8 refurb from cameta .................it's worth the wait .
if you have 500 now to spend you are halfway there , seriously get the nikon 17-55 dx
Click to expand...

I'm going to second this suggestion. I rented the 17-55 back in December to go to Disney and on my D5000 it was great. I was set to purchase it, refurbished or used but I came across the 24-120 and Im set on that. A friend of mine has the Tamron 17-50 and I messed with it a little but didn't like it. I see you're from Denver, I know B&H and Adorama both had the lens, it was used but looked like it was in pretty good shape. Wait and get the 17-55 and you won't be disappointed.
 
T

Tyler

Senior Member
I don't have the 500 right now to spend on it. I would in a week or two but I just don't know if I could justify spending 1k on a dx lens when I don't know yet how long I will be using a dx camera.

The pro friend of mine shoots sony and buys either sony tamron or Carl zeiss I think he may have an old minolta lens or two as well. I never have asked him what is wrong with sigma but it kinda scared me away.

I have found a few tamron 17-50 2.8 second hand for 250-300 non vc and vc which is honestly what I would really want to spend right now as I'm also looking to get an sb700. I've heard good reviews on both the tamron and sigma but the opportunity for a clean tamron is available at a good price.

Or I can spend a little more and get a Nikon 18-200 which I have also heard good things about.

I hate making choices...
 
Last edited:
Horoscope Fish

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
Tyler said:
The pro friend of mine shoots sony and buys either sony tamron or Carl zeiss I think he may have an old minolta lens or two as well. I never have asked him what is wrong with sigma but it kinda scared me away.
Click to expand...
There was a time, many moons ago, when Tamron, Sigma and numerous other third-party lens manufacturers couldn't hold a candle to a genuine Nikon lens. Those days are long past and in a big way. If someone wants to own nothing but Nikon kit, cool by me... But in all seriousness there are many Sigma lenses on the market today that equal, or surpass, their Nikon equivalents. Put simply, IMO, you'd be a fool to rule them out.

.....
 
T

Tyler

Senior Member
I'm not ruling them out. I actually think he probably strays away from them from their focusing and QC issues about 10 years ago. It sounds like the sigma with the hsm motor won most the shoot outs between the tamron and nikon. The sigma is just a little out of my price range but may be worth the wait.

I just feel a flash would be most beneficial to me right now in a learning stand point. I could get just the sigma. Or I could get a sb700 and a second hand tamron which only ever so slightly falls behind the sigma.
 
Top