Standard/Normal Zooms

Blue_Esq

Senior Member
I'll be upgrading from the 5300 to the 7200 shortly and realize that I'll need to upgrade from my kit lenses (18-55mm & 55-300mm) accordingly. My plan is to eventually replaced the 55-300mm with the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 when money allows. Replacing the 18-55mm has me a little more puzzled. The Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 is and likely will remain out of my price range. In primary consideration right now are the follow lenses: Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8; older Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 AF; Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8; and Sigma 24-105 Art F/4. Any knowledge or suggestions will be very much appreciated.

***I usually shoot the baby,the dog, family members, general urban shots and travel photography.

**** Current lens line-up: Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-4.5
Nikon 55-300mm f/3.5-5.6
Nikon 50mm f/1.8
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8
 

SteveH

Senior Member
You don't NEED to upgrade your lenses, but yes the 7200 could well start to show up the shortcomings of your lenses... I made a similar jump from a D3100 to a D7100 a year ago. I have the 35 & 50mm primes, so I use these instead of the 18-55... As for the 55-300, that is harder to replace. The 70-300 is sharper (than the 55-300), but I got a second hand Nikon 70-200 and so far (8 months) I haven't missed the 2-300 range too much, but I am considering either a TC for the 70-200 or a 200-500mm when they are released.

At the shorter end, I hear very good things about the Sigma ART lenses... It's all down to personal preference and, as always, budget!
 
Last edited:

Blue_Esq

Senior Member
Thanks, @SteveH! I guess that I realize that upgrading the glass isn't an absolute necessity, but I don't like the idea of spending that much on a body and being held back by the kit lenses. Also, the ultimate goal is to go FF eventually and I'd like to start building an FX glass setup. I'm not sure that I'll really miss the extra 100mm either. I tried out the Tamron 70-200mm the other day at the shop and was in love.
 

SteveH

Senior Member
The 70-200's are great lenses regardless of whether it's Nikon, Sigma or Tamron... Mine is barely off the camera! As for the shorter end, you may want to consider a 35mm prime... The DX version isn't full frame, but at the price it comes in at, that's not such a concern unless you are going full frame within a year (I'm guessing you aren't since you are lining up a 7200 now!) I got my 35mm as my first prime, and the day that lens arrived was the last time the 18-55 went near my camera... I got the 50mm prime when my stepson put the 35mm on his D5500 for the first time!
 

Felisek

Senior Member
Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 is a great lens and I believe the Tamron counterpart is also good. I use it as a general walkabout lens and find the zoom range very convenient. Image quality is exemplary and it is reasonably priced. I think this would suite your needs nicely.
 

10 Gauge

Senior Member
I think you'd be well pleased with the Tamron 24-70 ƒ2.8. I just got mine over the weekend (I replaced my Nikkor 24-120 ƒ4 with it) and so far from the few test shots I've taken with it, it lives up to the expectation and hype. It's one of the few lenses that has beat out Nikon's own offering on DxO Mark, all the while being considerably less expensive than the Nikon variant. I purchased a gray market copy for $849 (opposed to $1299 for the US warranted copy) as I really wasn't all that concerned with ever needing to send it off for repair (a personal choice only you can make). At less than half the cost of purchasing the 24-70 by Nikon and having the same performance it really didn't take much convincing for me to know this was the right lens for me.
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
I'll be upgrading from the 5300 to the 7200 shortly and realize that I'll need to upgrade from my kit lenses (18-55mm & 55-300mm) accordingly. My plan is to eventually replaced the 55-300mm with the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 when money allows. Replacing the 18-55mm has me a little more puzzled. The Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 is and likely will remain out of my price range. In primary consideration right now are the follow lenses: Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8; older Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 AF; Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8; and Sigma 24-105 Art F/4. Any knowledge or suggestions will be very much appreciated.

***I usually shoot the baby,the dog, family members, general urban shots and travel photography.

**** Current lens line-up: Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-4.5
Nikon 55-300mm f/3.5-5.6
Nikon 50mm f/1.8
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8
My two-cents...

By all means keep the Tokina 11-16mm. Nothing else needs to be said here as far as I'm concerned.

The Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD equals its Nikon counterpart point-for-point, has excellent Vibration Reduction and does it all for a LOT less money.

If budget allows, the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD would be the logical partner for the above mentioned 24-70mm and is a superb lens. Really superb.

I have two Sigma f/1.4 Art series lenses and I can only attempt to warn you (puts on Serious Face)... These are the "crack cocaine" of lenses. So well built, so fast, so amazingly clean and sharp shooting you will look at your other lenses with disdain. Yes... They're THAT good. You may cringe when you pay for one but that pain will evaporate after a day of shooting only to be replaced with a new love for all things photographic. For the D7200 the 35mm f/1.4 would be my suggestion. Be sure to take advantage of the D7200 Auto-focus Fine Tuning capability to really make this lens sing because sing it will.
....
 
Last edited:
**** Current lens line-up: Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-4.5

You don't say what version you have of this lens (there are 4 I think). The II and the VRII are quite good. You'll spend a good amount to get easily noticed improvements. But if I were to replace mine I would lust after the Siggy 18-35 f1.8. You'll have to get a little closer on the long end but I think this is some of the best glass out there for DX bodies.
 

Blue_Esq

Senior Member
I don't have it with me right now, but I'm pretty positive that it is the VRII. Thanks for the recommendation. I was thinking about the Sigma 18-35 as well.
 

salukfan111

Senior Member
I have a 28-85mm nikon that is pretty sweet and does macro and the price on ebay was right (60 bucks). I shot some photos at a party (just goofing around) with iso 1600 and was shooting well in the dark. I found out later I need VR for that stuff because everything was soft due to low shutter speeds. I bought a 24-85 VR yesterday on ebay for 200 bucks for nightwork. With any light at all the 28-85 is pretty awesome.
 
Top