Still don't have a walkaround lens.

B

Blacktop

Senior Member
I have no more then $400 dollars to spend. I have pretty much ruled out everything except the Nikon 18-140, and the Nikon 18-200VRII

I can get a refurb 18-140 from Adorama for $329.95. Or an 18-200VRII used one for $399.00 in "E-" condition.

What to do, what to do...I've been researching this walkaround lens thing for months now. I'm tired...can't go on!

I
 
R

RON_RIP

Senior Member
Blacktop said:
I have no more then $400 dollars to spend. I have pretty much ruled out everything except the Nikon 18-140, and the Nikon 18-200VRII

I can get a refurb 18-140 from Adorama for $329.95. Or an 18-200VRII used one for $399.00 in "E-" condition.

What to do, what to do...I've been researching this walkaround lens thing for months now. I'm tired...can't go on!

I
Click to expand...
I know what it is like to study on a lens purchase for along time. If you are really down to these 2 lenses, you are doing better than some of us at times. it would seem to be a matter of reach at this point. If you need to have that longer 200mm focal length the matter would seem to be settled. If you can live with 140 you can save $80. So------ let us know what you decide and what your reasoning is as it may help another member in similar circumstances.
 
Michael J.

Michael J.

Senior Member
When I look at your signature and see what you've already got I think the 18 - 140 would be a great Walk around.

For loner needs you have the 55-200 and the 70-300.

Nikon D300 (70's Stevie Nicks)
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X116 Pro-DX (Don Henley)
Click to expand...
Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX VR
Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED IF AF-S DX VR
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG APO
Click to expand...


​
 
S

skene

Senior Member
18-140 if between those two...
If you want to open yourself more... 18-105... personally for a walk around you probably will not be at the long end of the scale. These can also be had for around $200 used a little more for new.
 
L

Lawrence

Senior Member
Michael has a good point about what you already have.
By switching lenses regularly you have everything covered but switching is not convenient for a walk around.
I have the 18-105 and am very happy with it.
If you got that you could essentially sell your 18-55 and 55 - 200 as these would both be covered.
This way you could save some money and make some money and buy even more gear.
Tough call though.
 
R

Rick M

Senior Member
If it was me with your gear list I'd sell the 18-55 and 55-200 and put it along with your $400 towards the nikon 16-85.
 
B

Blacktop

Senior Member
All good advice.
This is my thinking. I can't seem to sell the 18-55. the 55-200 nor the Sigma 70-300.

For the money that I could sell these things for , it would not be worth it, so I might as well just keep them.

The Siggy has no OS so basically without a tripod at long FL it is useless to me.
The 18-55 I'm kind of attached to so I will keep it. I like the IQ and the close focusing distance.

The 55-200 I can go either way. Sometimes I'll get some really nice images with it. (IF I can get 90 bucks for it, I'll let it go)

Really leaning towards the 18-140 because research tells me it has better IQ then the 18-200VRII. However I have no real world evidence of this.
 
E

Eyelight

Senior Member
Where you thinking of walkin' 'round? Seems like a lot of the pics you post are in the shorter range. However, if you can afford the second gen VRII, the extra 60mm and 2.5 oz, why not??????

Have you posed the question to SN70's
 
B

Blacktop

Senior Member
Eyelight said:
Where you thinking of walkin' 'round? Seems like a lot of the pics you post are in the shorter range. However, if you can afford the second gen VRII, the extra 60mm and 2.5 oz, why not??????

Have you posed the question to SN70's
Click to expand...

I'm not walking around a lot, because I don't have a walkaround lens. sheeeshh.:rolleyes:

SN70's wants a Tamron 16-300, but I have to let her down.
 
hark

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
My suggestion would be to sell both the Nikon 55-200mm and the Sigma 70-300mm (I tried one of Sigma's non VR lenses, but it wasn't too sharp). The Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR is STELLAR, and refurbished, it is $414.95. Unfortunately it is out of stock at Cameta, and I didn't see any refurbished ones at Adorama or B&H. :( It wouldn't be a walk-around, but since you love the results of your 18-55mm VR, the two would complement one another very well.

Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G VR AF-S ED-IF Zoom Lens - Factory Refurbished includes Full 1 Year Warranty
 
A

aroy

Senior Member
My idea of walk around lense is that it should be small physically, so I prefer the 18-55 kit. As the IQ of most reasonably priced zooms is ordinary at the long end, it makes little sense to walk around with a long piece of glass in anticipation of those rare long shots. Better to have a small between 150mm to 250mm prime for those long shots.
 
C

Chito

Senior Member
My walk around lens is the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4. It's just a bit over your budget I think. If I were you, I'd get rid of the 18-55 and the 55-200, keep the 70-300 and buy the 17-70. IME the Sigma 17-70 contemporary is a very sharp lens.
 
M

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
Every time i go walk about without my sigma zoom on i regret it,just been to the park with the 18-55 i missed wren,goldfinch,squirrel and flowers i couldn't get to,guess it depends where your interest is
 
Top