Forum menu
as above. thoughts?
I don't own either of them but I've heard less bad things said about the 18-105! Maybe have a quick search over on [url= http://www.nikonians.org/forums/dcboard.php ]the Nikonians forum[/url] for reviews of both. I think if you look at 3rd party lenses you'll get a better lense for the same money, with perhaps a greater zoom range (if that's what you're after).
jon
I own a 18-135 (non VR), and I do notice quite a bit of shake at the longer end. I can't offer anything about quality as I always assume any failings are due to handholding. You're welcome to borrow mine if you'd like to try it out. Be aware, if you're swapping lenses, that Sigma zooms work the opposite way to Nikons (same way as Canon) which is irritating (to me at least)
[i]Sigma zooms work the opposite way to Nikons[/i]
I [i]did[/i] not know that! Cheers sfb. I'll bear that in mind when considering a new lense.
Don't know about them, but if anyone wants to sell a 70-200 f2.8 vr lens for "sensible" money, I'll have it! 🙂
very generous mr barnes but not in uk for longer than a day or 2 until ssuk and prob not best time to play with someone elses expensive lense 😛
might have a look at sigmas then, dont need a massive zoom just be nice to have more than 55 and had used a friends 135 which was great
and its a d40 so need a lense with motor in it, found this link to sigmas thatll work [url= http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/11941/nikon_d40_sigma_lenses/ ]lenses[/url] and none are really that cheap compared to the nikons
I had a 18 - 135 after an 18 - 70 (wanted the extra reach). The 18 - 70 was a far better lense both in terms of construction and IQ. 18 - 135 was fine, just made me realise that the -70 was actually a great lense. No idea what the new -105 is like after an enforced move to canon.
ok thats good to know, yeah 55 just feels bit limited already after using the 135 but its v early days and still using fixed 50 all the time
oh dear mr rockwell doesnt like the 135 or the 105 at all
I have got the 18-135 on my D80 and it is great. Actually looking for a second lense at the moment, 70-300VR.
Best VR is a tripod!
until ssuk and prob not best time to play with someone elses expensive lense [:P]
oh, I don't mind. I got it cheap on ebay 🙂
I would go for the 105VR. VR is the best thing since sliced bread - particularly on lenses that aren't that fast and even though 105 isn't that fast, an extra couple of stops sharpenss has to be worth it.
I have the 18-135 and it's a great do it all lens, but I have a couple of gripes with it - the first is the plastic lens mount, which I imagine in time will develop some slop compared to a metal mount. The second thing is it has no 'focus position' indicator window, so if you are trying to take night shots and 'estimate' focus distance into a particular scenes it is nigh on impossible without a bit of trial and error.
Either than or stump up for the 18-200VR. I borrowed it off a friend for a weekend and it is fantastic. Only downside is it's quite bulky if you are just out and about and don't need the full range of zoom.
[i]oh dear mr rockwell doesnt like the 135 or the 105 at all [/i]
Wait a week, he'll have changed his "mind".
The best place to get opinions on this stuff is Nikonians, as guitarmanjon says above.
so what is the consensus on the rockwell files? a sheldon brown esque presence? although he's loved and loathed too.
anyway, ta stumpy that sounds decisive tho may wait and put money towards a 50 fixed 1.4. 18-200 would be awesome but wayyy out my price range and twice the size of the body.