Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 54
Like Tree3Likes

Thread: kit lens war 18-55mm vs 18-105mm

  1. #1
    No longer a newbie, moving up!
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    96
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    1 times

    Question kit lens war 18-55mm vs 18-105mm

    Ok i wanna replace my 18-55mm with a 18-105mm. Ive read tons of reviews about which one produces sharper images (using 35mm as focal length of comparison; and i dunno why 35mm is so golden). The reviews were mixed and m not sure which reviews are reliable. Can u guys share ur experiences wi with both lenses? Thx



  2. #2
    I spend too much of my life on TPF!
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    473
    My Gallery
    (0)
    Liked
    29 times
    35 is the golden focal length on dx as it is the normal lens on dx. Save your money, don't replace the 18-55 with the 18-105, you won't gain much. Maybe get a 55-200 or one of the prime lenses like 35 or 50 1.8 instead. When I had the 18-55, I hated it at first, but after I got more experienced I realized I was just blaming equipment. 18-55 is a great lens.
    "Darks on the left, lights on the right, greys in the middle and lord help us preserve the holy highlights." The Prayer of Proper Pixel Placement.

  3. #3
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,179
    My Gallery
    (0)
    Liked
    108 times
    Thanks to the 1.5 crop factor, a 35mm lens is on DX like a 50mm is on FX. And 50mm on full frame is the classic journalist / street photography / full body portrait lens.

    Also, the 35mm/1.8 DX is the smallest DX prime. That means, its the most low light tolerant lens.
    Nikon D600 + AF-S 28mm+50mm f1.8 + AF-S 16-35mm+70-200mm f4 VR

  4. #4
    I spend too much of my life on TPF!
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Pensacola, Fl
    Posts
    416
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    18 times
    Quote Originally Posted by zamanakhan View Post
    35 is the golden focal length on dx as it is the normal lens on dx. Save your money, don't replace the 18-55 with the 18-105, you won't gain much. Maybe get a 55-200 or one of the prime lenses like 35 or 50 1.8 instead. When I had the 18-55, I hated it at first, but after I got more experienced I realized I was just blaming equipment. 18-55 is a great lens.
    I'll have to disagree. You gain more versatility with more focal length. I feel that I have to change lens more with the 18-55mm. This is why I'm changing to the 18-105mm eventually. Mind you, I have the 55-200mm lens already as well as the 35mm lens.

  5. #5
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    minnesota
    Posts
    3,505
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    685 times
    Either will work just fine when provided with pleasing light.

  6. #6
    Been spending a lot of time on here!
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    San Luis Obispo, CA
    Posts
    155
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    6 times
    Are you using any other lenses as well, or would it just be the 18-105? I replaced my 18-55 with an 18-200 (Tamron, not Nikkor), and it's great. I'd eventually like to get a dedicated wide angle and a dedicated telephoto, but for the price, the Tamron gets the job done pretty well.
    Nobody cares about how expensive your memory cards are.

  7. #7
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Bowling Green, KY
    Posts
    2,014
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    418 times
    Quote Originally Posted by Solarflare View Post
    Also, the 35mm/1.8 DX is the smallest DX prime. That means, its the most low light tolerant lens.


    And here I was thinking that the aperture was responsible for the amount of light let in when all along it is focal length!
    nvarras7 likes this.
    Nikon D7000, Nikon MB-D11, Nikkor 28mm f/3.5, Nikkor 55 f/2.8 Micro, Tokina 11-16 f/2.8, Tokina 16-50 f/2.8, Tokina 50-135 f/2.8,
    Slik
    580DX, Domke F-2 & F-5XB,(3) Nikon SB-28 & SB-600, Yongnuo RF-602, Hoya 77mm CPOL

  8. #8
    No longer a newbie, moving up!
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    96
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    1 times
    Ok i get the 35mm on a dx now but... People say that the 18-105 has more moving parts so it produces less sharp images than the 18-55 (let alone a prime). Is there any sense to this argument?

    And yes, i only plan on replacing my kit lens with the 18-105. I also have a 35mm 1.8 and am planning to buy a wide angle lens in the near future. I just plan to use the kit ls as a normal all around zoom lens.

    And i have no intent to upgrade to fx
    Last edited by domu221; 06-12-2012 at 10:32 AM.

  9. #9
    TPF Junkie!
    TPF Supporter

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    203
    Posts
    2,387
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    369 times
    Quote Originally Posted by mjhoward

    And here I was thinking that the aperture was responsible for the amount of light let in when all along it is focal length!
    Lol!!!

  10. #10
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,196
    My Gallery
    (30)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    273 times
    I have the 18-55 and if you stay between f/8-f/16 it is OK. I doubt the 18-105 is any better in the range of 18-55 as the well, 18-55. However I can guarantee that the 18-105 is far superior in the 55-105 range lol. From what I have read and have spoken to from professionals, the 16-85 that runs around $700 when you can find them, is the best Nikon (normal) DX zoom.
    Last edited by greybeard; 06-12-2012 at 10:56 AM.
    Nikon D7000
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    my flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/796351...7633970810446/
    If it looks good, IT IS GOOD.

  11. #11
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Atlanta, GA, USA
    Posts
    2,667
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    485 times
    I had the 18-105mm for about a month, along with the 18-55mm at the same time.

    I'd say that they 18-55mm was a *tiny* bit sharper at 30-45mm and f/8. I'd say the 18-105mm was a bit sharper from 50-55mm and f/8. Everything else was pretty close to equal.

    the thing I didn't like about the 18-105mm from 55-105mm is that it wasn't really good at anything. It wasn't really fast enough for most wildlife, unless you got the animal just perfectly still and could snap a long exposure, or were in borad daylight (and if you're in broad daylight shooting wlidlife, why are you in broad daylight shooting wildlife?) the DOF control wasn't really good enough for portraits in that range, IMHO. Most everything I used from 55mm and up on it, honestly I would have gotten about as good of an image just cropping from 50-55mm.

    Essentially, I found that from 55-105mm, the thing just wasn't good enough to warrant paying more to 'upgrade' to it. It's not a bad lens, by any means, but unless you are constantly needing to go from 30mm to 105mm, it's not really good enough at any one thing to view it as an upgrade. It's a great starter lens if you get it in your kit with your D7000, but that's what it is. I don't really see a need to ever go out and buy it unless you just get an outstanding deal and still feel you are in the 'beginner' phase. Your best bet is to find somebody who just upgraded all their glass on their D7000 and then talk to them about all of its shortcomings (which they will be very aware of) and convince them they don't need it any more. I did that, got it for a song, and I still found no use for it, lol.
    Sometimes I forget to tell people I like their photos when I do C+C. If I gave you comments, I liked your photo. I don't bother with pictures I don't like at all most of the time.

  12. #12
    Been spending a lot of time on here!
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    San Luis Obispo, CA
    Posts
    155
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    6 times
    I almost forgot, if you ever use manual focus or circular polarizing filters, you'll find that the 18-55 rotating the front element to focus a big pain. We use manual focus exclusively here at work, so having an actual focus ring on the 18-105 is great.
    Nobody cares about how expensive your memory cards are.

  13. #13
    I spend too much of my life on TPF!
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Madison Heights, Mi
    Posts
    272
    My Gallery
    (0)
    Liked
    13 times
    To upgrade or not? Or is it even an upgrade? That's the real question.

    What does the 18-55 do/not do that makes you feel you want to switch? I can't answer that for you I will tell you why I did.

    I got the 18-55 and the 55-200 when I got my D5000. I never had an issue with image quality. I do this for fun and post the pics on the web. I don't need a $1000 lens for vacations and just walking around. I found it hard to manually focus. I hate the 55mm cutoff point. That is why I switched. If I went on a trip I was always switching between the 18-55 and the 55-200 to get the shot I wanted.

    I like the 18-105 because of the longer reach. I went to Disney over Christmas and with the exception of Animal Kingdom I did not even have any other lenses on me. I like the actual focus ring and that I can be in auto mode, let the camera focus and then tweak the focus without changing from auto to manual.

    I wish I had my pics from Disney online so I could post some of the pics I took with my 18-105.
    Nikon D5000, Nikkor 18-105 3.5-5.6, Nikkor 35mm 1.8, Nikkor 70-300 VR 4.5-5.6
    My Flickr Photo Stream

    My first pics with the D5000

    Vacation picture Galleries
    Mackinac Island, MI 2009
    Nashville 2010

  14. #14
    I spend too much of my life on TPF!
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Pensacola, Fl
    Posts
    416
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    18 times
    You guys know that newer Nikon cameras have Auto Distortion control to correct for barrel and pin cushion distortion?

  15. #15
    I spend too much of my life on TPF!
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    326
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    37 times
    Quote Originally Posted by gryffinwings View Post
    You guys know that newer Nikon cameras have Auto Distortion control to correct for barrel and pin cushion distortion?
    Yeah but who shoots in JPG? Almost every camera out there does that including a bunch of point and shoots.

 

 
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast

Ads

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. 18-105mm VR vs 18-55mm VR
    By EchoingWhisper in forum Photography Equipment & Products
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-10-2011, 10:40 AM
  2. 17-55mm or 24-105mm
    By quiksllver in forum Photographic Discussions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-19-2010, 07:17 AM
  3. WTB Nikon 18-55mm VR or 18-105mm VR lens
    By wang0215 in forum Buy and Sell
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-08-2010, 10:36 PM
  4. Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 DX or 105mm f/2.8 VR?
    By forzaF1 in forum Photography Equipment & Products
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-29-2007, 09:42 PM

Search tags for this page

18-105 vs 18-55
,
18-55 vs 18-105
,

18-55mm vs 18-105mm nikon

,

difference between 18-55mm and 18-105mm lens

,
nikon 18-105 vs 18-55
,
nikon 18-105mm lens vs 18-55mm
,
nikon 18-55mm lens vs 18-105mm
,
nikon 18-55mm vs 18-105mm
Click on a term to search for related topics.