Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Photography

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old May 1, 2013, 09:40 PM   #1
greekgod086
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
D7100, 18-105mm question.

Hello. I'm thinking of getting a D7100 to step into a more intermediate range. My question is does the 18-105mm kit lens offer any substantial advantages over the 18-300mm DX 3.5/5.6 lens?

I use my current camera to shoot landscapes, family events, and some street shots. I have the 18-300mm described above, a 35mm DX 1.8 prime, and a 24-70mm FX 2.8 that I'm borrowing from my friend (and might purchase later on).

If the 18-105mm only offers minimal advantages then I might just get the body only.
greekgod086 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 1, 2013, 09:59 PM   #2
MCH-1138
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: California
I don't see what the 18-105mm would add, assuming you are keeping all of your existing lenses (each of which it overlaps). It is smaller and lighter than the 18-300mm, but you would obviously lose a significant amount of reach (which I will assume you use).
MCH-1138 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 1, 2013, 10:06 PM   #3
greekgod086
Thread Starter
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Yes, especially if I end up getting that 24-75 lens. I think it's about 35-100 on a crop frame camera? It's more expensive and maybe a bit heavier, but from what I understand and from pictures taken it's a really nice piece of glass.

Thank you for helping me rationalize all this.
greekgod086 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 1, 2013, 11:07 PM   #4
mofunk
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Americas
When you add fast glass to any of these cameras you will get better results. 18-105mm isn't one of them. The first time I added 70-200mm f/2.8 I was wowed !

If you planning to get the D7100 ... also get a plan on which lenses you will like to use the most. I started, myself, a list of lenses to use. Narrowed it down to maybe 3-4. wide angle, walk around lens, zoom lens, and a prime. The walk around (24-70mm range) is what I like to shoot. Some people like 18-200 range. Then prime, either 50mm or 105mm. 50mm + foot zoom vs 105 + no foot zoom. Last a nice wide angle.

If you have the 35mm, start shooting with that until you next move. If you think the 18-300mm will fit your needs, than keep that and maybe down the road get the 24-70mm. Having all three in you bag will fit most of your needs. The only thing is if you need to shoot in low light at a wide range, the 24-70mm may not be enough. I shot an event with the 24-70mm and a few times I needed to go wider. The 17-55mm would have worked but I didn't have it with me.
__________________
MBP | PB |iPhone tID | iPad 4G | G4 | Touch 4G | iPod 30GB
mofunk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 1, 2013, 11:09 PM   #5
MCH-1138
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: California
Quote:
Originally Posted by greekgod086 View Post
I think it's about 35-100 on a crop frame camera?
Yes and no -- on a DX body like the D7100, the 24-70mm will give you a similar field of view (FOV) as what a 36-105mm would on a full-frame body (if such a lens existed). But it will give you the same FOV as the 24-70 range of any lens on the DX body. In other words, the 24-70 range of the 24-70, 18-105, and 18-300 will all look the same (with respect to FOV) on the D7100.

Quote:
It's more expensive and maybe a bit heavier, but from what I understand and from pictures taken it's a really nice piece of glass.
I have not used the 24-70/2.8, but I understand that it is a great lens -- considered by many (perhaps even most) to be the go-to standard zoom on a full frame body. If you are looking for something similar, but a little wider, you might consider the 17-55/2.8. Another great lens, at least for a DX body, but I would view that as an "either-or" -- you (most likely) don't need both the 17-55 and the 24-70.
MCH-1138 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2013, 03:55 AM   #6
spacedcadet
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Workaday

With the 18-300 you are making a lot of compromises in image quality to allow for the convenicence of the massive zoom range.
That said, I don't expect the 18-105mm to be a vast improvement on that front, better yes, but probably not THAT noticeable.
Recent posts on bythom.com suggest the best sets of glass for recent Nikons, the site is also a mine of information and reviews of Nikon gear.
spacedcadet is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 3, 2013, 04:26 PM   #7
greekgod086
Thread Starter
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
I had a chance to shoot a few pictures while on a field trip with the 24-70mm and I found it to be a really nice lens. The auto-focus is very swift and you kinda get used to the weight.

I would not call myself a professional photographer, but I was very pleased with a majority of the images after processing them through Lightroom.
greekgod086 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 5, 2013, 04:13 PM   #8
cc2096
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2005
Having owned both D7100 and the 18-105mm lens, I can tell you that you will not be getting any benefit getting that lens if you already own the 18-300mm. It has the exact same variable aperture throughout (of course the 18-300mm will have a larger zoom, but you'll hit the aperture ceiling right around the same 105mm mark on it as you would the 18-105mm.). Skip the kit, get the body, save the money for that beautiful 24-70mm f2.8! Happy Shooting!
__________________
My Gear: 2012 15" MBPr i7 2.6/16GB/512GB | 16GB iPhone 5 | 64GB iPad Mini LTE | 2010 Apple TV 2
cc2096 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 8, 2013, 03:11 AM   #9
SchneiderMan
macrumors 604
 
SchneiderMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: California
Quote:
Originally Posted by greekgod086 View Post
I had a chance to shoot a few pictures while on a field trip with the 24-70mm and I found it to be a really nice lens. The auto-focus is very swift and you kinda get used to the weight.

I would not call myself a professional photographer, but I was very pleased with a majority of the images after processing them through Lightroom.
I would get a 17-70mm f/2.8 by Sigma over the 24-70mm and the 18-105mm.
__________________
SchneiderMan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 8, 2013, 07:37 AM   #10
MCH-1138
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: California
Quote:
Originally Posted by SchneiderMan View Post
I would get a 17-70mm f/2.8 by Sigma over the 24-70mm and the 18-105mm.
Why do you recommend the Sigma over the 24-70/2.8?
MCH-1138 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 8, 2013, 10:21 AM   #11
ChrisA
macrumors G4
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Redondo Beach, California
Quote:
Originally Posted by MCH-1138 View Post
Why do you recommend the Sigma over the 24-70/2.8?
First it should be easy to see why the f/2.8 lens is better. But between the two f/2.8 lenses just look at the range. 24mm is not very wide on a DX body. But 17mm is likely wide enough for any kind of normal use. It sounds like only a few millimeters but the difference between 17mm and 24mm s huge
ChrisA is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old May 8, 2013, 10:52 AM   #12
MCH-1138
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: California
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisA View Post
First it should be easy to see why the f/2.8 lens is better. But between the two f/2.8 lenses just look at the range. 24mm is not very wide on a DX body. But 17mm is likely wide enough for any kind of normal use. It sounds like only a few millimeters but the difference between 17mm and 24mm s huge
Right, I meant between the Sigma and the 24-70/2.8. I just think it is useful to hear why someone thinks one lens is better than another, especially when everyone's uses may vary.

I agree that 17-24 is a useful range on a DX body -- I have a 17-55/2.8 and am frequently at the wider end. So the Sigma has that going for it.

But isn't the Sigma 17-70 a variable aperture lens (f/2.8-4)? So there is a trade-off at the long end in terms of max aperture. What about IQ? I don't have any experience with that lens. Of course, it looks like it costs significantly less (new), but it sounds like the OP has an inside line on a used 24-70/2.8.

I'm not trying to steer anyone away from the Sigma. Just trying to encourage discussion and understand the recommendation. What about the Sigma 17-50/2.8?
MCH-1138 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 8, 2013, 02:23 PM   #13
SchneiderMan
macrumors 604
 
SchneiderMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: California
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisA View Post
First it should be easy to see why the f/2.8 lens is better. But between the two f/2.8 lenses just look at the range. 24mm is not very wide on a DX body. But 17mm is likely wide enough for any kind of normal use. It sounds like only a few millimeters but the difference between 17mm and 24mm s huge
HUUUUGGGEEE



It's because the Sigma has a much more versatile reach, is newer too. ANd it's way more affordable at $500..
__________________
SchneiderMan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 8, 2013, 03:42 PM   #14
MCH-1138
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: California
Quote:
Originally Posted by SchneiderMan View Post
It's because the Sigma has a much more versatile reach, is newer too. ANd it's way more affordable at $500..
Fair enough. That's why I opted for the 17-55/2.8 instead of the 24-70/2.8 -- more useful range (for what I wanted) on a DX body. Although still rather pricey (even when purchased used).

The Sigma 17-70 is variable aperture though, with f/4 at the long end, right? Might be a factor for consideration. How does it compare to the 24-70 in terms of IQ or construction/build quality?
MCH-1138 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 8, 2013, 06:53 PM   #15
SchneiderMan
macrumors 604
 
SchneiderMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: California
Quote:
Originally Posted by MCH-1138 View Post
Fair enough. That's why I opted for the 17-55/2.8 instead of the 24-70/2.8 -- more useful range (for what I wanted) on a DX body. Although still rather pricey (even when purchased used).

The Sigma 17-70 is variable aperture though, with f/4 at the long end, right? Might be a factor for consideration. How does it compare to the 24-70 in terms of IQ or construction/build quality?
I haven't used neither but I know the build quality is on par with Nikon if not better this time around. I'm pretty sure yes, it's a variable aperture but it's a given really at this price.
__________________
SchneiderMan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 10, 2013, 08:06 PM   #16
greekgod086
Thread Starter
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
So would that 17-70mm lens be more appropriate for landscape shots? I won't be getting one anytime soon, but it is something that I can make note of. I get my D7100 tomorrow and I have the three lenses I mentioned all ready for use.

I have some other questions regarding some settings and post shooting editing, but I'll try looking for those answers first on my own.
greekgod086 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 10, 2013, 08:32 PM   #17
MCH-1138
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: California
Quote:
Originally Posted by greekgod086 View Post
So would that 17-70mm lens be more appropriate for landscape shots? ... I get my D7100 tomorrow and I have the three lenses I mentioned all ready for use.
Personally, I would not get the 17-70 if you already have the 24-70 as one of your three lenses (and intend to keep it) because there is far too much overlap between the two. I would instead look for a separate wide-angle lens (i.e., something in the 10-24, 12-24, or 11-16 range). But that's me.

If you are choosing between the 17-70 and the 24-70, you might find the wider wide end on the 17-70 useful for landscapes. Of course, you might also find that 17mm (on a DX body) is not wide enough for your needs. You can use your 18-300 lens to try that out.
MCH-1138 is offline   1 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Photography

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:23 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC