View Full Version : Upgrading the D40x Kit lens, help!
Chumpalot
18-04-2009, 15:53
I've noticed that the image sharpness on my 70-300 VR is a huge improvement when compared to that of the 18-55 kit lens for my D40x.
I do like the versatility of the 18-55 and at the moment it lives on the camera and is my main lens (I after all only have 2 :p). However I would like to upgrade this and just wondered what people's thoughts and opinions were.
I'm looking into a Tamron 90mm for some macro work (I have heard it is also good for portraits so that's that base covered) As mentioned I also have the 70-300 VR. I just need something 'in-between' if you like.
Would an upgrade to the 18-55 VR be a viable option? I'm not looking to break the bank, just a general improvement in picture and image quality.
Thanks for listening :)
Dave
Don't bother upgrading to the 18-55 vr, the optics are pretty much identical to the 18-55.
If I were you, I'd seek out an 18-70 - fantastic quality and will AF on your body too!
Cheers,
James
Flash In The Pan
18-04-2009, 17:34
One of the newer Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 with the motor in would be my choice (around £200, used), it's almost as good as the Nikon 17-55mm and that costs a grand nowadays :nuts:
fallen_mathi
18-04-2009, 17:46
second for the tamron :) have one on order my self, tried out a friends, and was very impressed by how sharp it was.
if not that, you could consider the sigma 24-60, or the tamron 28-75.. ive heard good things about both, but you do loose a little off the wide end...
Chumpalot
18-04-2009, 18:38
Mmm I think I would miss the wide angle a little... but if it means getting overall better image quality I can live with that. Plus it'll force me to purchase a wide angle lens in the future :)
Thank you all for the suggestions. I will look into both the Nikon and the 17-50 Tamron.
:)
If you want to stay the Nikon route, a 2nd hand 18-70 or perhaps an 18-105mm VR (the D90 kit lens) - pretty much the same optically. Ideally I would go for a 2nd hand Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 (with motor lens so it AF's on the D40x). :)
Chumpalot
18-04-2009, 21:17
I think it's going to be the Tamron to be honest. Have read plenty of good things about it.
andy_fozzy
18-04-2009, 22:56
Hi Dave :wave:
Congrats on the 70-300VR!
I've used the Nikon 18-70, cheap, sharp at F8, light and good focal range.
I've had a Tamron 17-50 F2.8. VERY sharp, best at F4-F8. Again, very light and sturdy, focal length is a tad restricting.
Currently got a Sigma 18-50 F2.8. Pretty much the same as the Tammy actually. Good at F2.8, great at F4, utterly outstanding at F5.6 (as was the Tammy). Will also do a 1:3 macro shot at 50mm, which is pretty good really.
Bear in mind also the Sigma 24-70 F2.8. BUT, it's MASSIVE!
I had one for a while, but it really is a tank huge monster :D
Chumpalot
19-04-2009, 11:42
Hi Dave :wave:
Congrats on the 70-300VR!
I've used the Nikon 18-70, cheap, sharp at F8, light and good focal range.
I've had a Tamron 17-50 F2.8. VERY sharp, best at F4-F8. Again, very light and sturdy, focal length is a tad restricting.
Currently got a Sigma 18-50 F2.8. Pretty much the same as the Tammy actually. Good at F2.8, great at F4, utterly outstanding at F5.6 (as was the Tammy). Will also do a 1:3 macro shot at 50mm, which is pretty good really.
Bear in mind also the Sigma 24-70 F2.8. BUT, it's MASSIVE!
I had one for a while, but it really is a tank huge monster :D
Thanks Andy, some good info there.
I'm currently watching a few Tammys on eBay. I'm not too bothered about it not focusing automatically on my D40, I could probably do with the practice. :p
Focal length doesn't bother me too much to be honest.
That aside, I'm loving the 70-300 :love: What a great piece of kit.
Chumpalot
19-04-2009, 11:53
They seem to be as rare as rocking horse droppings on eBay. New only and most are from USA/Japan.
How much out of interest would my nikon 18-55 be worth?
They seem to be as rare as rocking horse droppings on eBay. New only and most are from USA/Japan.
IME they are one of the more common offerings on the bay. :thinking:
Chumpalot
19-04-2009, 12:21
IME they are one of the more common offerings on the bay. :thinking:
There don't seem to be any used at the moment on there :(
Anyway, I'm after the Tamron 90mm macro first. I can worry about this lens later :)
rotherad
19-04-2009, 12:25
I would definitely go for the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, I stupidly bought the 18-55mm VR with my D80 and the difference between the two is huge, sold my 18-55mm straight away and cant say I have ever regretted it, also it gives you the opportunity to stop down to f/2.8 if needs be.
Chumpalot
19-04-2009, 12:37
I would definitely go for the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, I stupidly bought the 18-55mm VR with my D80 and the difference between the two is huge, sold my 18-55mm straight away and cant say I have ever regretted it, also it gives you the opportunity to stop down to f/2.8 if needs be.
Exactly. At least the 18-55 can still fetch over £100. The standard 18-55 isn't worth a bean!
I find going from the 70-300 VR to the 18-55 a terrible drop in image quality :thumbsdown:
rotherad
19-04-2009, 13:10
Yeah, I think it is one of the things that make people think that their D40/x/D60 etc is a lower quality picture wise but it is down to the lens that they bundle with it, the Nikon 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 (which was the kit lens for the D70s) is a good lens to go with and can be found pretty cheap if you are in the right place at the right time, I have one and it is miles better that the 18-55mm.
Chumpalot
19-04-2009, 16:33
Yeah, I think it is one of the things that make people think that their D40/x/D60 etc is a lower quality picture wise but it is down to the lens that they bundle with it, the Nikon 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 (which was the kit lens for the D70s) is a good lens to go with and can be found pretty cheap if you are in the right place at the right time, I have one and it is miles better that the 18-55mm.
I figure if I'm going to upgrade the lens I may as well make the jump to a tamron or similar. I know I'll only regret it otherwise.
I'm more than happy with the quality of my D40x and I have only just started to scratch the surface.
I'll be keeping my eyes open on eBay :)
I have a D40X, and changed the kit lens... :) I am very happy with the 16-85 VR lens.
Chumpalot
20-04-2009, 15:05
Haven't consider the 16-85 VR... damn you and your spanner throwing graham!
Chumpalot
20-04-2009, 15:49
I have narrowed it down to the following:
Tamron 17-50 F2.8 - wondering whether I would miss out on the zoom end on this lens.
Nikon 16-85 VR - Haven't read anything about this lens really. Longer focal length is a positive.
Sigma 18 - 50 F2.8 - Again, not read a lot on this lens but feel it needs some consideration.
I'm still edging towards the Tamron to be honest.
Haven't consider the 16-85 VR... damn you and your spanner throwing graham!
:D not to mention the slight wide angle at the bottom end ;)
Tamron all the way out of those three for me. Coupled with the 70-300mm VR you will have a nice couple of lenses there...
Chumpalot
20-04-2009, 17:05
:D not to mention the slight wide angle at the bottom end ;)
Graham, you are not helping :thumbsdown: :p
Tamron all the way out of those three for me. Coupled with the 70-300mm VR you will have a nice couple of lenses there...
I'm about to raid the internet for reviews. I may be a while.....
18-70 "kit" lens gets my vote. The only Dx lens I ever had and I would have kept it had the buyer of my D200 not needed a lens to get him started!
The Tamron 90mm f/2.8 is a fine lens for Macro (where the loss of AF on your D40 won't be a problem) but may be a little too long for a portrait lens unless you can get a reasonable distance from your subject. Consider the Sigma 105 f/2.8 as well - I ended up with the Tamron since that turned up before a Sigma did! Both are around the £200 - £225 mark from a dealer with a warranty.
Chumpalot
20-04-2009, 17:23
18-70 "kit" lens gets my vote. The only Dx lens I ever had and I would have kept it had the buyer of my D200 not needed a lens to get him started!
The Tamron 90mm f/2.8 is a fine lens for Macro (where the loss of AF on your D40 won't be a problem) but may be a little too long for a portrait lens unless you can get a reasonable distance from your subject. Consider the Sigma 105 f/2.8 as well - I ended up with the Tamron since that turned up before a Sigma did! Both are around the £200 - £225 mark from a dealer with a warranty.
How about the Tamron 18-50 F2.8?
Chumpalot
21-04-2009, 21:10
Me again :p
I'm about to purchase the Tamron 17-50 but now I want to make sure the one I get will autofocus on my D40! What letters do I need to look out for to ensure I get the right one?
Many thanks
Dave
Dave Pickett
21-04-2009, 21:30
The Tamron 90mm f/2.8 is a fine lens for Macro (where the loss of AF on your D40 won't be a problem)
But the latest version has a built in motor, I've got one and it autofocuses perfectly on my D60 (and of course on the D90)
I am staggered how much better my Tamron 90 and Nikon 50 f1.8 are than the std zooms, wish I could afford more primes!
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.