Nikon's 18-105 VR Lens

chuckinsocal

Hi Gang,

I've had my D80 for about 2 years now and I've mostly used the 18-135 kit lens which seems pretty adequate most of the time but I'm starting to think that my IQ could be better.

I've been wishing for the 18-200 VR but at $750 it never seems to fit into my budget.

So now I'm looking at Nikon's 18-105 VR lens at about $300. I've read the reviews and they're generally good with the exception of some distortion, which I think is present in most telephotos, and its plastic construction which I can probably live with as long as I don't drop it from anywhere too high on anything too hard.

So my question is: Is the glass any better and will the IQ be any better with this lens than my 18-135 (VR not withstanding)? Or, am I paying $300 for the same IQ but just having the advantage of VR?

I'd love to see good or bad comments from anyone who uses this lens and anyone else who is familiar with it.

As always, thanks for your help.

Qarik

I don't have it but it is certainly not one of nikon's greatests. If you want good "image quality" on a budget:

50mm 1.4 or 1.8
80-200mm 2.8
16-85mm (the only variable aperture zoom I would reccomend)
85mm 1.8

There are probably a few more

chuckinsocal

Thanks Daniel for your suggestions.

You're right ... I really should have a 50mm prime but most of my photography is of the walk around, PJ, and documentary type and I really like the flexibility of a zoom.

I already have the 70-300mm VR which I love but it's a little too long on the short end for walk around photography. I just use it when I need the longer reach.

I looked at the 18-85 VR but it's a little pricey and my knee jerk reaction is that for a few bucks more I could get the 18-200 VR.

85mm prime would be too long and inflexible for what I do.

They're all great suggestions but unfortunately they don't work for me and what I like to do.

I know the 18-105 VR is still just a kit lens but I was hoping for a little better glass quality along with the VR which is the main draw cuz my hands just ain't getting any steadier these days :cry .

Thanks again.

time2smile

check out the Sigma 18-125 with OS

Qarik

get the 50mm 1.4 imo. it will stretch you to become a better photographer by eliminating zoom. Plus now you have good low light lens and great shallow DOF when/if you need it...all that and better IQ then anything you have now.

NikonsandVstroms

The issue is that wide zoom range, if you were willing to have less the Tamron 17-50 and 28-75 F2.8's have amazing image quality and are a huge jump from the kit lens.

A good thing to remember is that the bigger the range usually the more compromises that have to be made.

chuckinsocal

Thanks Guys for all the suggestions. I'll certainly consider them.

I'm really hoping to hear from someone who actually uses the 18-105 VR to let me know what his/her experiences and opinions are of the lens.

craig_d

chuckinsocal wrote: »

Thanks Guys for all the suggestions. I'll certainly consider them.

I'm really hoping to hear from someone who actually uses the 18-105 VR to let me know what his/her experiences and opinions are of the lens.

It might be worthwhile to read the user comments (and the lab test results) on this lens here:

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1221/cat/13

Most of the people who have it seem to like it, though some criticize its plastic mount and lack of a distance scale, and one guy says his copy failed after only six months.

Basically, you're considering trading the D80's kit lens for the D90's kit lens. Why not move up from kit lenses altogether?

angevin1

chuckinsocal wrote: »

Thanks Guys for all the suggestions. I'll certainly consider them.

I'm really hoping to hear from someone who actually uses the 18-105 VR to let me know what his/her experiences and opinions are of the lens.

I know(!) it is hard to resist those zooms...for the ease and all...but I am with Daniel and you did mention a Street PJ kinda shootin style. I would say go to a prime, perhaps the 50 f/1.8 or that newer 35mm f/1.8 . Both are fine lenses, light in weight, and Cheap! And the Tamaron 17-35 or 17-50 are both decent little cheaper zooms and in a usable range for your style!

Grainbelt

no specific Nikon experience, but I have a 35mm 2.8 prime for my pentax DSLR that absolutely lives on my camera. Just like walking around with an 80's film camera and a fast 50mm (the 35 is roughly 52mm equiv).

Nikon has that 35mm 1.8 that they brought out, I'd suggest you pick it up, use it for a few months, see how you like it. I love shooting primes, so maybe I'm weird.

Zerodog

I had the 18-105 for a while and used it a bit while I had it. It was ok. I did get some nice shots with it too. But compared to other lenses I had at the time it was lacking something. Couldn't put my finger on it. But I swear it was color and contrast. So I sold it. I ended up with a nikon 17-55 and I love it. But that thing is big, pretty heavy and expensive the trade off is it is very sharp, and very fast focusing. But it isn't the best to put inside my fishing bag or walk around all day with it in a museum. So my solution for travel was a 50mm 1.8 That thing is tiny, light, cheap, and awesome. It is tack sharp and has a funny bokeh that is kind of cool. I like it a lot but I wanted something wider on the cropped body. I stumbled upon a nikon 20mm 2.8. That thing is also tiny. And the IQ is really nice. Now, is a tough choice between the the 50 and the 20 for travel stuff. I ended up taking my 20mm 2.8 and my 80-200 on vacation to Hawaii. I never really felt like I was lacking anything.

So really you can't go wrong with getting the 50mm. It is something to have and learn to use. The f1.8 opens up a whole other type of photograph that is not possible with a kit lens. The DOF is really incredible. So is the low light ability.

If it seems too long, get a 35mm. That is more like a 50mm for film or full frame.

chuckinsocal

I just wanted to thank everyone for their input and suggestions.

The verdict is in: I'm probably going to order a 35mm prime so it's in my bag and I can use it in appropriate situations. I'm sure the IQ will be far, far better than what I'm getting with my 18-135 and it'll open a whole new chapter in my photographic ventures.

As for the zoom, the main reason I'm looking at others is for the VR. These old hands aren't getting any steadier and the VR will help a lot with much of what I do. Over at PhotoSig.com you can search for photos by camera, lens, and other criteria. The photos I found taken with the 18-105VR were, with few exceptions, of pretty respectable quality.

And, all the reviews I've read are generally positive. Most people are pretty happy with it. Hopefully I can get a good copy and get respectable results.

Since I'm so spoiled by the range of my 18-135 I'd probably be frustrated with much less. And, at $300 or so I can squeeze the 18-105VR into my budget.

So, I'm gonna go ahead and order the 18-105VR and take it for a good test drive. If I like it, great. If not, I can always return it for a refund or an exchange.

Thanks again to everyone for their input and suggestions.