Recommendations for Nikon kit lens replacement (broken lens)


Nov 24, 2013
13
0
0
32
Singapore
#1
Hi, all

I am deciding which lens to buy for replacement of my 18-55mm VR.
(I have 18-55mm VR, 55-200mm VR, 35mm)

While out shooting, I accidentally screwed up my AF motor while taking off CPL by turning the front of the lens.
I was thinking about getting another lens soon enough anyway. :bsmilie:

I was thinking about the 18-105mm but I heard it is actually softer than 18-55mm.

What are some of the lenses you would recommend me for under $400-500 other than 16-85mm VR? (I don't mind second hand)
(I don't quite need the best lens but maybe something better than the 18-55mm VR)

Thanks,
checkmate007
 

Last edited:

shierwin

Senior Member
Dec 29, 2008
3,466
10
38
East Coast
#4
Nov 24, 2013
13
0
0
32
Singapore
#5
Last edited:

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,660
68
48
lil red dot
#6
Tamron 17-50 is sharp and gives you the option of F2.8, so you can get a faster shutter speed in low light situations.

The non-VC version is slightly sharper than the VC version. Both versions are priced at an excellent value.
 

Dec 24, 2013
414
0
16
30
Singapore
#7
Under 400?
Tamron 17-55 f2.8
Non vc are all over the place and super cheap.

Have a bigger appetite ?
Sigma 18-35mm f1.8
Owned it. Sharp sharp sharp. Bokeh is awesome. F1.8 is awesome. Its like owning 3 primes in one zoom lens that doesn't even compromise on sharpness, bokeh and colours.
 

Mar 1, 2012
1,585
6
0
Singapore
www.facebook.com
#8
Tamrom 17-50 non-VC is by far, the most value-for-money standard zoom with fast constant aperture for Nikon DX cameras, from a photographic point of view. It has no VC amd AF is noisy, but these affects video more than photos.
 

Octarine

Moderator
Staff member
Jan 3, 2008
12,518
32
48
Pasir Ris
#9
Do you mind explaining why you chose the lens? :)
I heard the AF for this lens isn't quite good compared to others of its kind (noise and speed)
The AF is fine, I don't have any issues with it. Yes, it has a more noticeable noise than other lenses. But trust me, you can't hear it on the pictures ;)
The advantage is the sharpness, making this lens very useful when used wide open.
 

rhino123

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 1, 2006
5,243
15
38
NA
#10
TS. If you are going to get the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 lens, I would really recommend the VC version. Sure... lots of people had said that the VC version are not as sharp, etc. But frankly speaking, I find that difference really minimal, my good friend had the non-VC version and my ex-girlfriend had the VC version, I used both and find that the difference are not really that significant however the VC do help tremendously.
 

Nov 24, 2013
13
0
0
32
Singapore
#11
Thanks all, I will just have to decide between the VC and non-VC now.
The choice is rather hard since people seem to have clearly contrasting opinions on this matter. Hmm.

Just wondering, how do you distinguish a 17-50mm with BIM from one without it?
 

Blur Shadow

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2005
4,886
4
0
#12
I wonder if the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 OS can fit your budget? Can't be sure of the prices..
 

Nov 24, 2013
13
0
0
32
Singapore
#13
I wonder if the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 OS can fit your budget? Can't be sure of the prices..
I have considered the lens too.
It sells for about $600 on Techno Gadgets so should be able to fit in my budget if I get used lens.

But here comes the "need vs want" dilemma too.
 

Last edited:

Blur Shadow

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2005
4,886
4
0
#14
I was a former user of the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 non-VC version.

I found the lens to be sharp, sufficiently light, and value for money.

However, I was pretty impressed by the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 OS in my limited use, and found it sharper, superior in focusing, just as light, and comes with OS!
 

Top Bottom