Upgrading the D40x Kit lens, help!

C

Chumpalot

Messages
669
Name
David
Edit My Images
Yes
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
 
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:
 
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...
 
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). :)
 
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
 
andy_fozzy said:
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
Click to expand...

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.
 
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?
 
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.
 
rotherad said:
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.
Click to expand...

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:
 
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.
 
rotherad said:
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.
Click to expand...

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 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.
 
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...
 
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.
 
Nod said:
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.
Click to expand...

How about the Tamron 18-50 F2.8?
 
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
 
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)
Click to expand...

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!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top