Mid Priced Nikon General Purpose Lens

Hi All,

I'm looking at upgrading from a Nikon D5100 to the Nikon D7100.

I am also looking for a decent general lens, preferably somewhere around 17-70mm.

I used a Sigma 17-70mm 2.8-4.5 which was OK, but I was looking for something slightly better if possible.

My budget is around £500, but if I could get a lot better lens at £600 for example, I could maybe stretch to that.

Currently I'm looking at the Nikon's -AF-S 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED DX VR Lens, but I'm wondering if there is anything else out there.

Many Thanks!

James

Jimbob 2705 said:

Hi All,


Currently I'm looking at the Nikon's -AF-S 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED DX VR Lens, but I'm wondering if there is anything else out there.

James

Click to expand...

Hi James. Welcome to the forum.

Nikon 16-85mm f3.5-5. VR lens is a great all around lens for DX. It has similar field of view compared to the Nikon 24-120mm f4 VR lens on a full frame. Not a good performer indoor just like the kit lenses and will require a speed light to illuminate your subjects.

Consider prime lenses too such as the Nikon 35mm f1.8G.

Welcome to Nikonites,

The 16-85 is a very nice lens but I've never used it so I can't comment. I do use the Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC which I find very nice. The 2.8 constant aperture is nice to have and the VC (vibration control) works well too. Some say the Sigma 17-50 is better but I don't know personally. You should be happy with any of the 3 above mentioned lenses, the 16-85 giving you a little more reach where the two others will allow you to work in lower light conditions. It's up to you to decide which is more important for you. For sharpness, I think there might be small difference between these, plenty of reviews on the net might say otherwise...

Enjoy your Nikon.

Thankyou very much both!

My other lens is Nikon AF-S 70-30mm VR, so I'd ideally like something to take me up to 70mm (or higher), so I've got the complete range covered.

I've narrowed it down to the following I think :
__________________________________________________________________________________________________

1) Nikon AF-S 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED DX VR ~ £440

- Looks ideal, covers the whole range I want. Problem is that its not that low of a f-stop, and quite expensive compared to the Sigma. Has VR which is good.

2) Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC OS Macro HSM ~ £340

- New version of my last lens with the benefit of OS and f/4 instead of the previous f/4.5. Also £100 less than the Nikon with the benefit of lower f-stops. Is the image quality on the Nikon £100 better?

3) Sigma/Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 ~ £310/£340

- A f/2.8 lens which is ideal, problem is that it only goes up to 50mm, where I would prefer 70mm or similar. Shame really as they aren't that expensive for a consistent f/2.8 lens. I think I will feel a little lost without the extra 20mm reach of my previous Sigma, as I do use it quite a lot.

4) Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM ~ £580

- A f/2.8 lens which is ideal, problem is that it only goes down to 24mm, where I would prefer sub 20mm if possible. I do also take a few photos fully zoomed out, so I may miss the 7mm less. How much difference does 7mm make on a DX Body (or should I say 11mm in DX's case)? Also this lens doesn't have VR or OS but I know I could get the Tamron version if I wanted it for an extra £200 or so. I assume its a FX lens, so the image quality should be better at the edges?
__________________________________________________________________________________________________

So I'm undecided at the moment, obvious choices are the Sigma 17-70mm or the Nikon 16-85mm.

The question is the Nikon worth the extra £100?

Also, any other lenses that I may of missed out?

Many Thanks,

James

Jimbob 2705 said:

Hi All,

I'm looking at upgrading from a Nikon D5100 to the Nikon D7100.

I am also looking for a decent general lens, preferably somewhere around 17-70mm.

I used a Sigma 17-70mm 2.8-4.5 which was OK, but I was looking for something slightly better if possible.

My budget is around £500, but if I could get a lot better lens at £600 for example, I could maybe stretch to that.

Currently I'm looking at the Nikon's -AF-S 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED DX VR Lens, but I'm wondering if there is anything else out there.

Many Thanks!

James

Click to expand...

The new Contemporary Sigma 17-7- 2.8-4 is a fantastic lens.

http://nikonites.com/general-lenses/14880-sigma-17-70-c-quick-thoughts.html#axzz2nOIPc3Hv

mauckcg said:

The new Contemporary Sigma 17-7- 2.8-4 is a fantastic lens.

http://nikonites.com/general-lenses/14880-sigma-17-70-c-quick-thoughts.html#axzz2nOIPc3Hv

Click to expand...

Thanks for that

I am tempted by that, or I'm undecided whether the Nikon 16-85mm is worth the extra £100...

Jimbob 2705 said:

Thankyou very much both!

My other lens is Nikon AF-S 70-30mm VR, so I'd ideally like something to take me up to 70mm (or higher), so I've got the complete range covered.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

4) Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM ~ £580

- A f/2.8 lens which is ideal, problem is that it only goes down to 24mm, where I would prefer sub 20mm if possible. I do also take a few photos fully zoomed out, so I may miss the 7mm less. How much difference does 7mm make on a DX Body (or should I say 11mm in DX's case)? Also this lens doesn't have VR or OS but I know I could get the Tamron version if I wanted it for an extra £200 or so. I assume its a FX lens, so the image quality should be better at the edges?
__________________________________________________________________________________________________

So I'm undecided at the moment, obvious choices are the Sigma 17-70mm or the Nikon 16-85mm.

The question is the Nikon worth the extra £100?

Also, any other lenses that I may of missed out?

Many Thanks,

James

Click to expand...

You are correct in that the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 will leave you lacking for something wide, but it is a really nice lens. Yes, it is an FX lens. The Tamron version with the vibration reduction most likely is even better--I think Tamron's glass tested to be better than Sigma's. Here is a photo with my Sigma 24-70mm paired with my D90 at 24mm with f/11:

Jimbob 2705 said:

Hi All,

I'm looking at upgrading from a Nikon D5100 to the Nikon D7100.

I am also looking for a decent general lens, preferably somewhere around 17-70mm.

I used a Sigma 17-70mm 2.8-4.5 which was OK, but I was looking for something slightly better if possible.

My budget is around £500, but if I could get a lot better lens at £600 for example, I could maybe stretch to that.

Currently I'm looking at the Nikon's -AF-S 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED DX VR Lens, but I'm wondering if there is anything else out there.

Many Thanks!

James

Click to expand...

About 9 months ago, I was asking myself those same questions. I wanted a decent mid range zoom for my D7100, I also have the 70-300VR. In the end I narrowed it down to the 16-85, and the Sigma 17-70. I almost went with the Sigma, I wanted to want it. The cheaper price was attractive, but in the end I went with the Nikon 16-85. I definitely have no regrets, the extra dollars are forgotten now.
I am happy with the Photos I get with the 16-85, the only time I was wanting for a faster aperture was when I was taking photos inside an old cathedral, in the end I took it off and used my 35 f1.8, it wasn't wide enough, but I got some good photos all the same.

I will add that when I got my D7100, I already had a Nikon 24-85 that I bought because I thought I was going to get the D600, I didn't find it a handy lens for dx, I preferred my 18-55 kit lens. I sold the 24-85 to fund the 16-85, which is a lot better than the 18-55.

Despite my prime lenses I revert to my 16-85 and use it almost all of the time. I consider it the almost perfect dx travel and walk about lens. It is the lens for the 7000series cameras. It is as wide as I ever need to be and almost as long as I wish it was. You will not be disappointed if you chose this lens.

A Nikon 24-70 f2.8 would be perfect but for that budget, I am not sure you can find one. So a third party similar lens will be the one. Cheapest option is the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and I have no complaint.

Thanks everyone. Think I am going to go for the Nikon 16-85mm, I was tempted by the Sigma 17-70mm but after reading about issues with the D7100 and Sigmas/Tamrons, I better go for Nikon just to be safe.

Not 100% sure though, so I'm going to give it a few days to think about it!

Jimbob 2705 said:

Thanks everyone. Think I am going to go for the Nikon 16-85mm, I was tempted by the Sigma 17-70mm but after reading about issues with the D7100 and Sigmas/Tamrons, I better go for Nikon just to be safe.

Not 100% sure though, so I'm going to give it a few days to think about it!

Click to expand...

I think you will be happy with the 16-85 Jimbob.

The problems with the 3rd party lenses don't seem to be very widespread, a lot of people are reporting no issues with their kit.

Seeing how your 17mm end is a 2.8, and that's as good as it gets, I'd possibly aim for a 35 1.8G to cover that mid-range with awesome and noticeable low-light performance without losing AF/metering. Then 70-300 you have can honestly be a workhorse in itself.