Nikon 18-105mm kit worth it? Or is it better to go body only?

Started Feb 17, 2013 | Discussions thread
teddoman
teddoman Senior Member • Posts: 2,469
Re: Tamron 17-50 f/2.8

paulski66 wrote:

It wasn't a speed demon, but I very successfully used it to take pictures of my older sons at cross country meets, so I always found it sufficient.

The original version, which is widely considered optically superior, has no focusing motor, but it was snappy enough on my d90. If AF speed is a critical issue (or if you have a camera without the built-in motor), you could try the newer version, which does have Tamron's version of AF-S, though everything I've read is that it's a step back optically.

Thanks for the tip. Interesting that the older one gets a much better review at slrgear but is actually a cheaper lens by about $150. I'll be using it with the D7000 so don't need the newer version. I guess the other feature on the newer version is vibration control. I guess stabilized would be ideal, but this is quite reasonably priced compared to the Nikkor zoom and hopefully stabilization isn't needed at the shorter focal lengths. Anyway, the Nikkor zoom isn't stabilized anyways either.

Frankly, it's either the Tamron, the 18-105 kit, or the 35 mm f/1.8 prime as a first lens. I'm heavily leaning towards the Tamron right now, since it gives the widest angle, f/2.8 max aperture through the entire zoom range, a pretty good walkaround zoom range, and slrgear review was quite good.

 teddoman's gear list:teddoman's gear list
Sony Alpha a7R II Sony a9 Sony E 30mm F3.5 Macro Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* E 24mm F1.8 ZA Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +6 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow