which Nikon lens to keep...?

which would you keep.?


  • Total voters
    8
  • Poll closed .
Messages
7,517
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
I've ended up with

Nikon AF-S 18-55 DX VR 3.5-5.6 kit lens (cheap but good optics, plastic mount)
Nikon AF-S 18-70 3.5-4.5 DX (well made, metal mount)

I dont really need VR - mostly landscapes on a tripod

which would you keep.........?
 
Last edited:
I used the 18-70 a lot before I bought an FX body and thought it punched above its weight - sharp, fast AF, and the solid construction of a mid-range rather than a kit lens (though I got it in a kit). That extra bit of range is useful too, like having the 28-105 on FX. The 18-70 distorts noticeably at the wide end but I don't know if the 18-55 is any better. Is the VR or the extra 55-70 range with 2/3 stop more speed at the long end most useful to you? Do you prefer the results over the overlapping range from one or the other?
 
I'd say keep them both. The 18-55 is a 'kit' lens and is ideal for passing on as a sweetener with a camera as it is only worth a few quid second-hand anyway. :thinking:
 
I used the 18-70 a lot before I bought an FX body and thought it punched above its weight - sharp, fast AF, and the solid construction of a mid-range rather than a kit lens (though I got it in a kit). That extra bit of range is useful too, like having the 28-105 on FX. The 18-70 distorts noticeably at the wide end but I don't know if the 18-55 is any better. Is the VR or the extra 55-70 range with 2/3 stop more speed at the long end most useful to you? Do you prefer the results over the overlapping range from one or the other?...............

thanks...I'll take them both out on a sunny intervals type day and judge if there is a noticeable difference (to me)
I do like the heft/feel of the 18-70
I'm told to switch OFF the VR on a tripod

I also have a Tokina 17mm which Ken Rockwell (ah, bless) says
''... Its sharpness is better than many newer and more expensive lenses. It's as sharp as my Nikkors, with much less lateral color fringing. ..''

decisions, decisions............... :thinking:
 
I'd say keep them both. The 18-55 is a 'kit' lens and is ideal for passing on as a sweetener with a camera as it is only worth a few quid second-hand anyway. :thinking:

prob true but I've settled on my Nikon F3, Nikon D90 and Nikon D300 as my kit - I have 11 Nikon lenses and no bodies to sell

my Canon A1 and lenses will shortly be up for sale..............(y)
 
Personally, I'd keep the 18-70. Although it came as part of a few kits, it outperforms most kit lenses (including the 18-55). The extra 15mm is handy too, although that wouldn't be a deal breaker for me. However, if you find yourself needing the VR, the 18-55 has it.

TBH, given the low value of both contenders, I'd probably keep both just in case my first choice decided that it wasn't going to play any more!
 
The 18-55 ---- is ideal for passing on as a sweetener with a camera as it is only worth a few quid second-hand anyway. :thinking:...
Personally, I'd keep the 18-70. -------- given the low value of both contenders, !..

thanks -- listing at £65+ on that site - selling for £35+........on a State Pension I canna leave £35 just lying around
I'll pop it in Classifieds for £xx posted - No takers; it goes for Auction

thanks to all for all the input ..............18-70 it is then..... (y)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sky
If I still had a crop Nikon body, I'd still have the 18-70. When the D200 went, it took the 18-70 with it - was sorrier to see the lens go than the body TBH!
 
Back
Top