p.1 #1 · Help me decide between 18-70mm, 18-105mm and 16-85mm
I am going to buy D60 and would like to get walk-around lens for it. I have narrowed down my choices to three lenses (all Nikon):
18-70mm - Like the f-range on this lens (3.5-4.5). The only problem is that it is not a VR lens.
18-105mm - I think I can live with the plastic mount as this lens will rarely leave camera. Plus it is VR lens.
16-85mm - This would probably is the best lens out the the three but keep in mind that's about twice the cost of 18-105. Plus while the zoom range is very nice, the f/5.6 at the tele end is nothing special (at least in my opinion).
There is also 18-135 but that's non-VR lens and I really do not need anything longer than 100mm. I currently have Pentax digital camera with Sigma 17-70mm and this focal length is perfect for my needs. The kit lens (18-55) was just too short.
I know I should go for the best lens I could afford (and I can afford $550 for the 16-85mm lens) but I will use the camera for some casual family shots plus some landscapes, vacation snapshots, etc so I do not want to spend more than necessary. My main goal is fast focusing as I am switching from Pentax which is slow in that department.
p.1 #2 · Help me decide between 18-70mm, 18-105mm and 16-85mm
I had the 18-105 VR for a while and I will say it was a tack-sharp lens with excellent contrast. I didn't care for the low build quality and plastic feel, ultimately I sold it and upgraded to the 17-55mm f/2.8 mainly for indoor shooting and the shallow depth of field provided by the f/2.8 speed.
The 18-70mm is a good lens with nice image quality but I would say the 18-105 was better. If build quality is not a big deal for you I would go for the 18-105mm, which can be found for $200-$250, which is half the cost of the 16-85mm. The 18-70mm can be found for $150 and it has better build quality. Choices, choices. For me I would buy them both, test them out for a few weeks and sell one of them afterwards, if you buy right it shouldn't end up costing you anything. Another option is to go a local camera shop and try them both, takes bunches of images (bring a CF card) and then go home and compare for yourself.
p.1 #3 · Help me decide between 18-70mm, 18-105mm and 16-85mm
I bought my bother a D60 and 16-85 and I have had an 18-70. Unless you need the extra range of the 18-105, the 16-85 is the best of the three. It is very sharp. VR is indespensable unless you have a fast lens in my opinion. The two or three extra stops you gain with the VR make up for the 1 stop loss of the lens, unless you do a lot of low light shooting. Then the extra stop of viefinder brightness may be worht it.
p.1 #4 · Help me decide between 18-70mm, 18-105mm and 16-85mm
You can probably find the 18-55vr and the 55-200vr both for about the same price as the 16-85.
If you want to go cheaper than the 18-105vr should be your choice since the 18-55vr by itself wouldn't have the range.
They are all good lenses, you just have to decide what you want it to do more as none of them are the same focal length so they each have their own advantages/disadvantages.
p.1 #7 · Help me decide between 18-70mm, 18-105mm and 16-85mm
As a walk around lens, the 18-55 VR lens is hard to beat. It is inexpensive, has excellent image quality, is light and takes no place in a camera bag. I use it with my D70S (the non VR version) and it never ceases to amaze me with its beautiful images. I guarantee you that if you do your part, the lens will do its part.
The 18-70 is also very good although more expensive. I cannot make recommendations on the other lenses you mentioned because I have no experience with them.
I use the 18-55 all the time. I would say it is great for snapshots of the family and I have done well with it for landscape photography also.
Good luck with your choice.
William Rodriguez
Miami, Florida.
p.1 #8 · Help me decide between 18-70mm, 18-105mm and 16-85mm
Thanks to all who replied. 18-55mm is nice small lens but too short on the tele end. I had such lens on my Pentax and never really used it. I think I will go for the 18-105mm with VR and if I do not like it, I can sell it and upgrade to 16-85mm.
chrisnyee wrote:
Out of curiosity what's the reasoning for swapping from Pentax to Nikon? I feel if I were to get a small travel kit it would be Pentax.
I am swapping (hopefully upgrading) to get faster autofocus. Pentax is slow in that department and now I have two year old who is just too fast for my K10D. The whole post about my swap is here.
p.1 #9 · Help me decide between 18-70mm, 18-105mm and 16-85mm
Having used every one of Nikon`s consumer class 18-XX, XXX lenses the 18-105 is the only one that I won`t be wanting to upgrade from. It`s that sharp and most folks looking for a lens in this class want that sharpness and (a good zoom range). It stays on my camera almost all the time.
The only one (consumer class lens) that I think might be a step up in IQ would be the 16-85 but that lens is in a higher price category.
p.1 #10 · Help me decide between 18-70mm, 18-105mm and 16-85mm
18-70 or 16-85. The lens mount on the 18-105 is junky plastic which will abrade and leave plastic debris in your mirror box, which will later make its way onto your sensor.
I suppose if you never change lenses it would be all right.
p.1 #11 · Help me decide between 18-70mm, 18-105mm and 16-85mm
uccmmcpo wrote:
Having used every one of Nikon`s consumer class 18-XX, XXX lenses the 18-105 is the only one that I won`t be wanting to upgrade from. It`s that sharp and most folks looking for a lens in this class want that sharpness and (a good zoom range). It stays on my camera almost all the time.
How is 18-105 when it comes to autofocus speed? Does it hunt a lot in not so perfect lighting conditions?
p.1 #13 · Help me decide between 18-70mm, 18-105mm and 16-85mm
chemprof wrote:
18-70 or 16-85. The lens mount on the 18-105 is junky plastic which will abrade and leave plastic debris in your mirror box, which will later make its way onto your sensor.
I suppose if you never change lenses it would be all right.
Gerald
Gerald, as once before I advised you , you must have a screwed up metal lens mount , perhaps a burr or you are just plainly overly rough with them because I`ve not experienced or read of any shredding issues with any of Nikon`s plastic mounts. Neither have I seen extraordinary specs of dust on the sensor caused from it. Personally I think it is just as possible for metal to grind together and cause the same effects.
While these mounts are probably not as durable as metal they certainly aren`t junk either.
You might have had an isolated negative experience but it certainly doesn`t reflect in the greater community of users.
Maybe you ought to stop dispensing false blanket statements based on your grudge against plastic mounts .
That said I don`t change lenses often but isn`t that one of the main reasons for wanting to buy a 18-105 zoom ?
p.1 #15 · Help me decide between 18-70mm, 18-105mm and 16-85mm
uccmmcpo wrote:
Having used every one of Nikon`s consumer class 18-XX, XXX lenses the 18-105 is the only one that I won`t be wanting to upgrade from. It`s that sharp and most folks looking for a lens in this class want that sharpness and (a good zoom range). It stays on my camera almost all the time.
The only one (consumer class lens) that I think might be a step up in IQ would be the 16-85 but that lens is in a higher price category.
I was looking at the 16-85 very hard. My biggest concern is flare. I have more than enough pro lenses, but if the 18-105 or 18-65 had excellent flare control, I'd buy one.
p.1 #16 · Help me decide between 18-70mm, 18-105mm and 16-85mm
Kerry Pierce wrote:
I was looking at the 16-85 very hard. My biggest concern is flare. I have more than enough pro lenses, but if the 18-105 or 18-65 had excellent flare control, I'd buy one.
I looked at different reviews before I bought mine (18-105) and really couldn`t find much if anything regarding any significant flare issues. To be honest, I haven`t looked for nor have I experienced any myself. Maybe someone else can chime in on this.
p.1 #17 · Help me decide between 18-70mm, 18-105mm and 16-85mm
chemprof wrote:
18-70 or 16-85. The lens mount on the 18-105 is junky plastic which will abrade and leave plastic debris in your mirror box, which will later make its way onto your sensor.
I suppose if you never change lenses it would be all right.
Gerald
I have never noticed any problem with plastic lensmounts. Certainly there is no abrading of the plastic, and I change lenses very often. The mounts on my cameras are all dead smooth and have no burrs. Perhaps you should be checking your camera to see why lensmounts are being torn up. It is certainly not the norm.
p.1 #18 · Help me decide between 18-70mm, 18-105mm and 16-85mm
The 16-85 is the only one 16mm at the wide end. That may be worth thinking about. Depends on your interests but strikes me that might be more valuable for some people than the 85-105 coverage.
p.1 #19 · Help me decide between 18-70mm, 18-105mm and 16-85mm
I would recommand to visit http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/index.php
they have tested all three lenses, and came to the conclusion that the 18-105 is equal to the 16-85mm, so at the end being both VR lenses, only the focal range matters.
I have the 18-70mm lense and it served me perfectly for years, it is great from f5 to f16, it is not so great for flash or indoor photos.
p.1 #20 · Help me decide between 18-70mm, 18-105mm and 16-85mm
Not that I`d ever claim plastic lens mount to be superior but it does have a lower coefficient of friction than metal , thus less force is required to attach . If you look at a metal lens mount which is usually chrome over brass you will notice some wear after a few lens changes just as quickly as you would with a plastic mount. Eventually the chrome will wear off and brassing will occur.
Personally I think it`s almost a wash with respect to pros and cons and not a big consideration since most of these plastic lenses are light in weight and indeed aimed more toward the amateur users. Not that they aren`t capable of professional results but that the overall build quality doesn`t exceed the build of it`s lens mount.
