Upgrade for Nikon AFS DX 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6G VR

C

capten

Messages
5
Edit My Images
No
Hi all this is my first post on the forum and am relatively new to photography. I am currently using a nikon D500 with my Nikon AFS DX Nikkor 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6G VR, Nikon AF-S VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED Lens and also a Nikon AF-S 50mm f1.8G. Recently I have been taking photos of my friends babies, children, landscapes and have had very good comments. As a result a lot of my friends have asked to do their children's parties and portraits etc. Therefore I have been contemplating upgrading my 18-55 kit lens to a better quality lens. I have had a look at the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF-S NIKKOR and the Nikon 17-55mm AF-S f/2.8G IF-ED Dx but I can't warrant sending over a £1000.
Have you professionals got any suggestions and advice on any alternatives lenses, your help will be much appreciated.

Thanks
 
The Tamron 17-50 2.8 non-vc is a nice lens and can be picked for around £200 2nd hand.

Have you consider 2nd hand for the Nikon 2.8 choices?
 
If you're pretty happy with your current lens in terms of range but want bigger appertures then the Nikon 17-55 probably is the ultimate. You could save a bit by buying second hand but you'd still be looking at £600.

If that is still way over budget, take a look at the Tamron 17-50 2.8 non VC. It's pretty sharp and a decent price. I don't think it's at it's best wide open but it does seem usable at 2.8. There is also a Sigma 18-50 2.8 worth looking at and a Sigma 17-50 OS that is excellent. Neither are built to the same standard as the Nikon but then they're both a lot cheaper and something always have to give somewhere.
 
what do you want to improve about your current lens? I went 18-55 to 18-70 and there is a definite improvement in quality. The lens focuses faster, the manual override is nice for fine tuning the focus. I use mine as a walkabout lens and also a social event lens (with flash). I'd love 2.8, but what I'd really love is if the 16-85 lens was 2.8. I really like the 16/18 - 70/85 range but would like a bit faster aperture. In the meantime, I consider the 18-70 to be an f4 which is a sight better than the f5.6 of the 18-55. Second hand the 18-70 is around £100 or so.

Thanks
Rick
 
Rally depends on your budget.

a second hand 17-55 2.8 is going to be your best bet.
 
Thanks all the advice so far really appreciate it. Ideally want a better quality lens and faster aperture. Main use would be walkabout lens with a bit of landscapes, portraiture and children's parties etc. my budget ideally no more than £500 ish. I have considered 2nd Nikon lens but thought you wouldn't get it for my budget. Regarding lens focal range I'm still unsure. There have been a few occasions where 55mm hasn't been long enough meaning swapping over to my 70-300 and then swapping back.

Thanks
 
As you mentioned the Nikon 24-70 I'll throw the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 into the ring for consideration. It's a crackingly sharp lens* and a used copy can be had for a couple of hundred quid.

*: A good copy is crackingly sharp but they do vary a bit and you need to be choosy. I tried 3 before I found one that was good enough ... but boy, was it good :thumbs:
 
How about the nikon 28-70 f/2.8, same quality as 24-70 nikon but for like £300 less second hand
 
Steve is right, the Tamron is a very good value lens, not quite as good wide open as the nikon but get to f5.6 and its no different, it doesn't seem as solid but is available for £200 second hand. AF not quite as good as the nikon but still a very good lens. The 28-70 Nikon is also a good shout, and a very good lens.
 
cambsno said:
Steve is right, the Tamron is a very good value lens, not quite as good wide open as the nikon but get to f5.6 and its no different, it doesn't seem as solid but is available for £200 second hand. AF not quite as good as the nikon but still a very good lens. The 28-70 Nikon is also a good shout, and a very good lens.
Click to expand...

Agree about the Tamron though it would need to be one with a build in motor. Does one exist?

The 28-70 is a brilliant lens, pretty much the equal of the of the 24-70 but realistically even more expensive used than a 17-55. It's worth it though.
 
Thanks again for advice still unsure what to go for. In the mix so far are the tamrons 17-50, & 28-75, the Nikon 24-70 2.8 and the sigma 18-50.
Iv had a quick look at the Internet haven't had much of a chance but seen a few people complaining about the really slow AF on the tamron lenses and why are the non VC better. Quite a few reviews are also saying that the sigma lenses are better than the tamrons, what are your views on this?? Ideally if I had the money would go for the nikon's as I do like going for better quality things!!

Thanks again to you all :-)
 
Forgot to ask aswell apart from eBay where is the best places to look for 2nd hand lenses?
 
capten said:
Forgot to ask aswell apart from eBay where is the best places to look for 2nd hand lenses?
Click to expand...

On here is a great place for second hand gear!
I use the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and like others have said its very good for the money not great at f2.8 but usable.
I recently did a christening(church and party afterwards with only this lens) so maybe good enough for what you need.
 
capten said:
Forgot to ask aswell apart from eBay where is the best places to look for 2nd hand lenses?
Click to expand...

I'm assuming you won't have access to the classifieds on here but there are some great used dealers out there. MPB, Ffordes, Aperture, SRS, Misfuds etc. All have good reputations and will offer a warranty. Prices can sometimes be higher than a straight private sale but that very much applies to ebay as well.

For private ads, also check out AV forums, Gumtree and preloved.
 
Build up your profile on here and then use classifieds, great bunch of people on here! Better than ebay!

Grays of Westminster are excellent, you pay a premium but get proper service.

Yes, the Tamron AF was not up to the Nikon, but 2nd hand, you are talking of £200 v £900 !!! In terms of value for money its an excellent lens. Sigma I think can be good but many sigmas tend to be a bit iffy sharpness wise - if you get a good one its great though!
 
Let's not forget London Camera Exchange for used gear,also highly recommended.
Most people recommend the non VC Tamron as it tends to be sharper than the VC version.
It's the non VC version that I use and I am more than happy!
I won an international landscape photography magazine competition with this lens so its not too shoddy!
 
Well I would recommend the vc version of the tamron :D Copy I have is super sharp wide open and vc is fantastic.
 
Also agree that Grays of Westminster is a fantastic place to buy second hand gear
 
Thanks all again for your comments. Think I'm going to have a good look on the web the weekend on the reviews of the tamron 17-50 f/2.8. & 28-75 f/2.8. What I've seen so far it seems a bit hit and miss with these lenses. Some people are saying the AF is terrible and some are saying its good. Then some are saying the VC is very poor and others are saying they have had no problems with it. Majority of people are saying it is a sharp lens. It sounds like you can be lucky and have a good lens and not so and have a poor one. One last question. Is it really worth me changing my Nikon 18-55 lens for one of the tamrons. Am I going to see a difference in the image quality/sharpness etc

Thanks
 
capten said:
Thanks all again for your comments. Think I'm going to have a good look on the web the weekend on the reviews of the tamron 17-50 f/2.8. & 28-75 f/2.8. What I've seen so far it seems a bit hit and miss with these lenses. Some people are saying the AF is terrible and some are saying its good. Then some are saying the VC is very poor and others are saying they have had no problems with it. Majority of people are saying it is a sharp lens. It sounds like you can be lucky and have a good lens and not so and have a poor one. One last question. Is it really worth me changing my Nikon 18-55 lens for one of the tamrons. Am I going to see a difference in the image quality/sharpness etc

Thanks
Click to expand...

The advantage of the Tamron over the Nikon is the constant f2.8 aperture!
 
I would hold out and get a second hand Nikon 17-55mm f2.8, I did and managed to pick one up on here for £575. The difference between it and the kit lens is massive, couldn't be happier with it. If you get anything else you will always be wishing you'd gone for the nikon...
 
+1 for the 17-50 non vc tamron. Value for money wise it's hard to beat. Yes the nikon is better but for 3-4 hundred more, money might be better invested in an additional lens/speedlight/tuition etc.

Obviously I'd have had the nikon if money were no object! I plan to go ff one day and the holy Grail of the 24-70 f2.8.

Just off to get my lottery ticket

S
 
the tamron is good value but not as good a lens as the f/2.8 zooms, i would save up and get a real lens ;)
 
callumduff said:
the tamron is good value but not as good a lens as the f/2.8 zooms, i would save up and get a real lens ;)
Click to expand...

The tamron is an f2.8 zoom.

All depends what the OP wants.

Eg might be able to get a whole lighting setup to go with the mid range zoom for the same price as the nikon. Or just get the one lovely lens.

S
 
Sir SR said:
The tamron is an f2.8 zoom.

All depends what the OP wants.

Eg might be able to get a whole lighting setup to go with the mid range zoom for the same price as the nikon. Or just get the one lovely lens.

S
Click to expand...

i was meaning the nikon f/2.8 zooms
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top