 |
|
|
Brian Behrmann
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 10, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Sep 19, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $195.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Convenient focal length range
Quiet
Cheap
|
|
Cons:
|
Images on the soft side
Feels cheap
|
|
|
The 18-70mm range of this lens makes it good for walking around and quickly recomposing. It is also exceptionally affordable. However, the images produced are not nearly as sharp as Nikon's pro zooms and certainly don't hold a candle to even the more modest of prime lenses. I wouldn't attempt to use this lens for professional purposes, but it is certainly passable for the casual user.
|
|
 Sep 19, 2007
|
|
E. Amador
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 7, 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 7, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, Good AF, build quality is good
|
|
Cons:
|
Dust magnet, vignetting @ 18mm wide open
|
|
|
This is a good walkaround lense. The 70mm gives it a noticeable advantage over other kit lenses.
At 70 mm wide open the bokeh is pleasant and you can make good portraits.
Not fast enough for low light condition.
The moustache distortion @ 18 mm is weird and hard to correct.
The copy I have, survived a 1.5 meter fall on the pavement. It is still sharp.
|
|
|
Sep 7, 2007
|
|
Don Farra
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 4, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 5, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $285.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
great IQ
|
|
Cons:
|
unacceptable lens wobble
|
|
|
This was my first AF Nikon lens and it was the first lens I had to return for a refund. While the image quality was very good and the handling was excellent, the lens wobble was just to much to bear. Given the price, weather sealing, and other top notch pro quality attributes I found the lens wobble unacceptable and a major disappointment. I did a web serch and found the lens wobble was not the exception but closer to the rule for this lens so trading it in for another copy was not an option. By contrast the Tamron 18-250 lens that replaced it is mechanically superior product, but at nearly twice the cost.
|
|
|
Sep 5, 2007
|
|
Frank Eleveld
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 4, 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 4, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Price/performance ratio, AF-S, sharp, lightweight, almost no CA
|
|
Cons:
|
Vignetting and distortion below ~22 mm
|
|
|
For the price, this is a great lens. I found my copy to be sharp and contrasty unless shooting directly into a bright light source. For best performance it needs to be stopped down to between f/5.6 and f/11. AF is swift, precise and quiet, and being able to manually override it a useful addition.
Build quality isn't the best, but it's acceptable for a $ 300 lens - it's certainly not a toy lens. If you want something that lasts and gives marginally better performance, you'll have to buy the 17-55 f/2.8 instead. For those on a budget wanting to get an allround DX midrange zoom, the 18-70 is definitely worth the money.
|
|
|
Sep 4, 2007
|
|
ssnap
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 13, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 438
|
|
Review Date: May 26, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
AF-S and great range.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not F2.8 and can be soft at 18-24 like other's have reported.
|
|
|
I got this lens with my D70 3 years ago, and it's still in use on my D200. I would like to have some 2.8 glass in this range but after testing the Sigma 24-60 f2.8 I realized that 2.8 isn't always that great. This isn't the sharpest mid-range zoom, but I don't have any complaints wide-open with this lens. I found with the sigma I used that it was softer up to f5.6 and f2.8-4 on that lens wasn't pretty and I wouldn't want to use it. Note: I haven' tried the 17-50 tamron or 18-50 f2.8 sigma.
While this lens is slower, it does have the AF-S for quick and quiet AF and does well at 3.5-4.5.
|
|
|
May 26, 2007
|
|
Louis Otto
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 25, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 25, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
SHARP!! Cheap, nearly silent and quick autofocus, non rotating front element, light, reasonably cheap.
|
|
Cons:
|
67mm filter size is weird, distortion at 18mm, backwards focussing takes getting used to
|
|
Firstly, for a 7.7 review this lens is much better than it seems. As a walkabout lens it's brilliant, I chose it over the 18-55mm because I wanted the extra 15mm for slightly more coverage.
The built quality is fairly plasticky, but without it being horrible. Keeping the price down was the right move to make I suppose.
The sharpness of this lens is incredible, edge to edge it really does impress. Colour quality is great and there's hardly any chromatic abberations. There is slight barrel distortion at 18mm but at 20mm its practically gone, so no worries really.
A bit of a bother is that the focus and zoom rings are switched round, which sometimes catches you unawares, as you're manually focusing suddenly you zoom in a few notches and it ruins your focus 
A good point of the lens is that the autofocus is snappy and also pretty silent, which is great in my opinion.
Overall I'd highly recommend the lens.
|
|
|
May 25, 2007
|
|
Andrei Todea
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 18, 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Apr 18, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, light, cheap (if bought as kit)
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
Very good kit lens.
Very sharp.
Some vignetting but nothing to worry about (it's normal I guess for a DX lens)
Good build quality for it's price range.
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2007
|
|
williamkazak
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 8, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 5893
|
|
Review Date: Dec 22, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Great focal length range for people and events.Ed glass.AF is nice.Sharp enough for portraits.
|
|
Cons:
|
Cannot trust the build quality over time.Flares in backlight situations.67mm filters.Cannot be used on the edges at 18mm.Not F2.8.
|
|
|
I bought mine with a D70S kit because I needed another camera and I like the D70 series from Nikon.This lens is nice enough for general use but pushing it into pro like situations reveals it's shortcomings.Flares outdoors in backlight situations.Not an F2.8 and with variable aperture you never know where the aperture is going to be when you set the camera on manual and the lens at F3.5.Cannot trust it at 18mm with people or groups because of the distorted edges.This lens is sharp enough for people and portraits but if you really want to see sharp try the 105mm F2 AF-DC or the 105mm F2.8 AF-Micro Nikkors.
This lens is for general snapshots and for that purpose, it excels but it is not a pro lens.
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2006
|
|
LB31291
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 30, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Sep 18, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
Good Nikon glass.
|
|
Cons:
|
I have to BLAST Nikon on this - they are really making CHEAP lenses. The glass is nice, I understand that. However, the lenses they are making (18-55, 18-70, 18-135) for the D80 and others are cheap plastic garbage. It is highly insulting as a consumer paying Nikons top dollar to get platic mounts and a K-Mart feel to the lens. My very inexpensive Quantaray feels like a tank compared to these lenses.
I do not care how lightweight they are, they should be build with metal mounts at a minimum. It is sad to see Sigma, Tamron and Quantaray lenses that I would rather own than a Nikon. NIKON - start putting some pride back into your manufacturing of lenses PLEASE.
|
|
|
See the CONS.
Nikon dropped the ball on this and many more of their newer DX lenses.
|
|
|
Sep 18, 2006
|
|
dj dunzie
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 14, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6908
|
|
Review Date: Sep 4, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
When purchased as a camera-lens KIT, this is a fantastic deal. Very decent general purpose lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
Competition from other Nikkor lenses / combinations.
|
|
|
As a general-duty go-everywhere lens, you'll be hard pressed to find a better "kit" lens. When buying a new camera, Nikon is practically giving this lens away in kit form.
I took some 3000 photos with this lens in ignorant bliss, and it does a great job. It's fairly quick, has a decent range, and images are pretty darn sharp.
However, as a benchmark, I have now upgraded to the 18-200 VR, and while there is a noticeable jump in price, the new lens is better in every way I can see. I have compared images at different focal lengths, ISO settings, and apertures, and the 18-200 (compared without VR on) provides better detail at each. OK, it's close, but the new lens does a better job with contrasting and produces more vivd, vibrant shots, particularly in brighter scenes. Now add in vibration reduction, nearly three times the zoom range, near-equal size and weight, and the 18-200 dulls my enthusiasm slightly for this lens.
However, maybe it isn't fair comparing it to the latest Nikkor offering, especially if you adjust for price (when purchased as a kit lens), in which case - the 18-70 is as I said a terrific general purpose lens and a value that is hard to beat.
|
|
|
Sep 4, 2006
|
|
koenigwitt
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 11, 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 11, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
low weight, fast AF, nice range
|
|
Cons:
|
poor colors, not really sharp, build quality
|
|
|
dissapointing
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2006
|
|
panos.v
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 15, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3934
|
|
Review Date: Jul 19, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, small and sharp even wide open. Fast and silent AF. Good range.
|
|
Cons:
|
Build quality reflects the price but it's still good. Distortion and vignetting at 18mm.
|
|
|
This is an excellent all-round lens. It is light and small, has AF-S for quick and silent AF and manual focus override. The lens is very sharp even wide open. Stop down to f/5.6 and it becomes excellent. The price is excelllent for the features and quality offered.
The only problems are the quite pronounced distortions at 18mm (but they disappear at >20mm) and the vignetting when wide open at 18mm.
Generally I think it is an excellent lens for the money and is ideal for travelling light or as a general walk-around zoom. For me, it is the best price-performance zoom lens in the market.
|
|
|
Jul 19, 2006
|
|
SoCalMan
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 23, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $250.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, excellent macro performance, price
|
|
Cons:
|
Build quality
|
|
|
This lens is destined to be a Nikon classic, not because its image quality is fantastic, but rather because it offers an unusual combination of quality and price.
I own two Nikkor 18-70 zooms. I have more than 20,000 images with this lens. Most amateurs will consider this lens to be superb.
Optical quality is very good. The lens is sharp at all apertures, has good contrast, focuses quickly and reliably, and has excellent macro performance. There is some variability lens to lens; try to test several if you can.
These lenses easily exceed the resolution of a 6MP camera (e.g., Nikon D70s), and test the resolution of a Nikon D200 (10.5MP). In other words, the same lens on a D200 produces much better results than on a D70.
Build quality is OK, but not first rate. On the other hand, this lens will be obsolete well before it wears out.
There are two significant issues. First, there is a lot of vignetting, especially at 18mm. This is easily corrected in Photoshop or Nikon Capture. Second, there is moderate distortion at 18mm, and it is complex and CANNOT be easily fixed with software. Be careful taking pictures with a flat horizon.
As a one-off lens, it is priced at about $300 as of June 2006. As a kit lens, it is much cheaper. At these prices, it is an extraordinary bargain.
I have tested this lens against Nikon's new 18-200 zoom. Up to 70mm, the 18-70 is every bit as good, and better in many samples. Of course, there is no VR. My experience with the 18-200 is that it starts to fall apart rapidly after 100mm. If you care about image quality, I would buy the 18-70.
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2006
|
|
Bonjour43MA
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 1, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 781
|
|
Review Date: May 29, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp! Small and light weight, easy to use, relatively cheap for how it performs, saturated and contrasty colors. Excellent lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
None for the price of the lens.
|
|
This is my 2nd copy of this lens and to my surprise it is A LOT better than my 1st copy that I got last year.
After starting out with the 18-70 last year I was never too happy with the performence, espeically the soft and dull images when you use it wide-open. I sold the lens and got something else to replace it and never thought about it again.
Until just last week, of course.
Out of curiosity I went to the local store and picked up a brand new 18-70 and it BLEW ME AWAY with its performence.
*just a note, I've owned and still own some of the following lenses and they've been known to be very sharp and contrasty, so I think I have an idea of what "sharp" is 
50/1.8, 50/1.4, 17-55/2.8, 80-200/2.8 AF-S, 300/4 AF-S, and Tamron's 28-75/2.8
*
I have test images to show that the 2nd copy is JUST AS SHARP as the 17-55/2.8 AND the 80-200/2.8 AF-S, at wide-open apertures to about f11. That's right, I couldn't believe my eyes at first so I ran through even MORE tests just to make sure that I didn't do anything wrong.
And the result turned out to be the same. THIS LENS performs IDENTICALLY to the 17-55 at ALL APERTURES! The ONLY difference would be the build quality and the low-light AF performence (because the 17-55 is a 2.8 lens).
I've heard that there are copies ot the 18-70 out there that perform at an extremely high level and it looks like I lucked out and found one of them... this will be my light-travel lens when I don't want to carry the 17-55 around.
Excellent excllent lens... provided that you get one of the sharp ones.
|
|
|
May 29, 2006
|
|
Knoe
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 23, 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 23, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap, light,
|
|
Cons:
|
bit fragile to me, soft
|
|
|
Its a nice standard lens to have, its got a good range and its pretty decent in overall.
the thing that bothers me is that nothing further away than 2 meters (7 ft)is sharp, its just impossible to get anything thats further away as sharp as it should be.
but as a kit lens its good enough i gues, there are far worse things than this lens, but if you have the money i'd go for something else.
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2006
|
|
jchastn
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 25, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 7
|
|
Review Date: Mar 25, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Good sharpness at everything but the very ends. This and the 12-24 DX make up a great "everything" kit without breaking my back. Great price for a good piece of glass.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not fast enough.
|
|
|
For a kit zoom, this is a great lens. I am using it and my 12-24 dx and have not yet felt the need to buy anything else(with the possible exception of the new 105 MicroNikkor VR that is coming out) Great color, good to great sharpness (depending on where you are in the zoom and what your aperture is),great price.
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
51
|
126334
|
Feb 10, 2011
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
88% of reviewers
|
$237.08
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
7.50
|
8.63
|
7.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
