Replacement for my 18-55mm

M

mrsamo

Messages
35
Name
Sam
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi folks,

I'd like some advice regarding a replacement for my Nikkor kit lens. I have a Tokina 11-16mm and I love the f2.8. I have been looking to replace my 18-55 for a long time now (had it for over 4 years) and was going to get the 18-200, however I think I caught the 2.8 bug and wish to know more about other all purpose-type lenses, namely :

- Tamron 17-50
- Sigma 17-70
- Nikkor 16-85

I know the Nikkor is not 2.8 but apparently it is a very good lens for reasons I don't know why. My shooting habit with the replacement will be more low light, action shots and better zoom. I know I won't get that with the Tamron but that itself is a great lens from what I've heard.

I also have the nifty fifty which covers 50mm and anything within, I do wish for better zoom though but do not want to be carrying so many lenses.

Thanks in advance for your advice,

Sam.
 
All 3 of the lenses you list are all excellent.

I felt even when the 16-85 came out it was over-priced. Its now more expensive - although IMHO its Nikon's best DX lens (I include the 17-55 f/2.8 DX in that statement) - the Nikkor 18-70 DX is another alternative to the 16-85.

The Tamron 17-50 is a stunner, and its the only one thats f/2.8 - that would be my choice, as it should be yours if you want constant f/2.8 from 11mm up to 50mm.

The Sigma 17-70 is also excellent, but only f/2.8 at 17mm.
 
I had the 16-85 for a while and its amazingly sharp, but not particularly fast and expensive as PD says.

It depends on what you want it for I guess, for me f/2.8 Tamron is the way to go - I'm looking to pick one of these myself in the next week or two...
 
puddleduck said:
All 3 of the lenses you list are all excellent.

I felt even when the 16-85 came out it was over-priced. Its now more expensive - although IMHO its Nikon's best DX lens (I include the 17-55 f/2.8 DX in that statement) - the Nikkor 18-70 DX is another alternative to the 16-85.

The Tamron 17-50 is a stunner, and its the only one thats f/2.8 - that would be my choice, as it should be yours if you want constant f/2.8 from 11mm up to 50mm.

The Sigma 17-70 is also excellent, but only f/2.8 at 17mm.
Click to expand...


Thanks mate, but for the Tamron you mean from 17mm up right?

The 16-85 sounds perfect and couples with my 11-16 but its not 2.8 and I feel it might be like using the 18-55 all over again (except with the greater range). If that was the case then I might as well go for the 18-105 VR or 18-135.

I want to like the Sigma 17-70 but as you said its only 2.8 at 17mm, and it seems that some owners eventually upgrade to the 17-50.
 
I would go for the Tammy. Reports to be good QC and sharp overall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top