Replacing D500 kit lens (16-80mm) with Sigma 18-300mm

Hi folks: so my local retailer emailed me to let me know that he can offer me the D500 body only or with the default kit lens at the holiday pricing still.

Now I'm debating whether to just get the body and get the Sigma 18-300 along with it instead of buying the kit.

I was thinking that the Sigma 18-300mm would make a good walk around lens and I would be able to do wide shots, portrait, and if I see some wildlife in my travels, I'd be able to get the focal length of 300mm.

Thoughts?

Kenny08 said:

Hi folks: so my local retailer emailed me to let me know that he can offer me the D500 body only or with the default kit lens at the holiday pricing still.

Now I'm debating whether to just get the body and get the Sigma 18-300 along with it instead of buying the kit.

I was thinking that the Sigma 18-300mm would make a good walk around lens and I would be able to do wide shots, portrait, and if I see some wildlife in my travels, I'd be able to get the focal length of 300mm.

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

I would highly, highly NOT recommend you doing this. It's like putting $50 radials on a Ferrari.

If you really want to use the 18-300, then put it on a D7200. I'd stick with the 16-80 for the D500. If and when you need reach, switch lenses... that's what it's for. I recommend the 70-200 F4: it's light enough that you can always travel with it.

Ok thanks.....why do you think the Sigma is a bad choice?

I'll consider the 70-200 - will look into it. There's also the Nikon 18-140mm I think..

Kenny08 said:

Hi folks: so my local retailer emailed me to let me know that he can offer me the D500 body only or with the default kit lens at the holiday pricing still.

Now I'm debating whether to just get the body and get the Sigma 18-300 along with it instead of buying the kit.

I was thinking that the Sigma 18-300mm would make a good walk around lens and I would be able to do wide shots, portrait, and if I see some wildlife in my travels, I'd be able to get the focal length of 300mm.

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Usually, the smaller the range of a zoom, the better the image quality. It might be convenient to have something like an 18-300, but the zoom range is 16x ... You will find that the quality is not very good at the extremes.

Also, the maximum aperture on the 18-300 at 18mm is f/3.5, and at 300mm it is f/6.3. Even though the D500 has very good high ISO, you will be spending most of your time at an ISO that you may not be comfortable with.

In the end, you may find yourself wishing you had a better combo, even if not as "convenient".

A zoom with a shorter range will give you much better quality. You will probably enjoy your picture taking more because you will get results you like better. You may not be able to take pictures of warblers with it - but the pictures you take will likely be keepers.

The 16-80 has a zoom range of 5, and apertures range from f/2.8 at 16mm to f/4 at 80mm. You can take portrait, landscapes, general street photography - and teh quality will be there. Not because it is Nikon, just because of the higher quality acheviable in a shorter zoom range.


JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers

I agree that a wide-range zoom will mean a loss in quality. It's the nature of the beast.

Why are you getting a D500? I got mine because I wanted an excellent general-purpose DSLR that, among other things, would have superior AF and high ISO performance and would be a logical successor to my D300.

I have used the Nikon 18-200 with the D300. But I knew I was doing that for convenience or as a travel or walk-around lens. When I wanted better results I'd use the 24-70 f/2.8 or 70-200 f/2.8 Those lenses, with their short zoom ratios and constant maximum aperture, are definitely sharper and otherwise better than the 18-200. I haven't put the 18-200 on the D500. I got the 16-80 with the D500 and find it to be an excellent general purpose or walk-around lens. When I want more reach I'll use the large and heavy 70-200, which is definitely not a "walk-around" lens.

Do not put an inferior lens on a professional camera body, by that you defeat the purpose of buying D500. If you want walk around Sigma lens you should seriously consider Sigma 17-50, f2.8 which I'm happy with.

I really like the D500 with 16-80mm combo as a walk around lens but I am surprised that so many people are opposed to the 300mm. I thought the D500 and the Nikon 200-500mm was supposedly an excellent combo. I have been saving my pennies for a 200-500mm for wildlife photography and also going after those distant shots. Now I am left wondering!

Rob

as long as you're aware of the compromises...

I used to travel with an 18-250 on a crop body DSLR and it was VERY convenient. While optimal for almost nothing, superzooms will allow you to get the shot.

The Nikon 18-300 is actually quite a good lens given its limits. And is f5.6 at the long end.

RobbyJA said:

I really like the D500 with 16-80mm combo as a walk around lens but I am surprised that so many people are opposed to the 300mm. I thought the D500 and the Nikon 200-500mm was supposedly an excellent combo. I have been saving my pennies for a 200-500mm for wildlife photography and also going after those distant shots. Now I am left wondering!

Rob

Click to expand...

There's a big difference in quality between 300mm on an 18-300 superzoom and the 200-500. The lens you're planning to buy is an excellent performer.

Danny W.

RobbyJA said:

I really like the D500 with 16-80mm combo as a walk around lens but I am surprised that so many people are opposed to the 300mm. I thought the D500 and the Nikon 200-500mm was supposedly an excellent combo. I have been saving my pennies for a 200-500mm for wildlife photography and also going after those distant shots. Now I am left wondering!

Rob

Click to expand...

The OP is considering an 18-300, which has a 16.67 zoom ratio. Getting good IQ from such a design over all the zoom range is a big hurdle.

The 200-500 you are considering has a 2.5 zoom ration and can waltz all the way from 200 to 300 with ease. Look a design like the 17-55/2.8, it only has a ratio of 3.24. The 70-200/2.8 is 2.86. The 24-70/2.8 is 2.92. Those are all considered excellent lenses. Even the 16-80 is only 5. The Nikon 70-300 has only a ratio of 4.29.

There is a reason those lenses are expensive compared to run-off-the-mill 18-xxx DX lenses

Superzooms are convenient. But sooner or later you will discover their IQ limitations.


JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers

Danny W. said:

RobbyJA said:

I really like the D500 with 16-80mm combo as a walk around lens but I am surprised that so many people are opposed to the 300mm. I thought the D500 and the Nikon 200-500mm was supposedly an excellent combo. I have been saving my pennies for a 200-500mm for wildlife photography and also going after those distant shots. Now I am left wondering!

Rob

Click to expand...

There's a big difference in quality between 300mm on an 18-300 superzoom and the 200-500. The lens you're planning to buy is an excellent performer.

Danny W.

Click to expand...

Ok thanks guys I feel better now. Now that you mention the amount of Zoom, I understand why you said what you said to the OP.

Rob

RobbyJA said:

Danny W. said:

RobbyJA said:

I really like the D500 with 16-80mm combo as a walk around lens but I am surprised that so many people are opposed to the 300mm. I thought the D500 and the Nikon 200-500mm was supposedly an excellent combo. I have been saving my pennies for a 200-500mm for wildlife photography and also going after those distant shots. Now I am left wondering!

Rob

Click to expand...

There's a big difference in quality between 300mm on an 18-300 superzoom and the 200-500. The lens you're planning to buy is an excellent performer.

Danny W.

Click to expand...

Ok thanks guys I feel better now. Now that you mention the amount of Zoom, I understand why you said what you said to the OP.

Rob

Click to expand...

Alternatively. Why not try those bigger zoom lens (24-120mm F4 by Nikon or 24-105mm Sigma F4). They are not that heavy as the 70-200.. have a fixed F4.. gets you from 24 to 105(or 120mm). I use the sigma one for walk around lens. Its heavy but not that much.