Nikon 18mm - 135mm Opinions?

Discussion in 'Photography Equipment & Products' started by K_Pugh, Dec 3, 2008.

  1. K_Pugh

    K_Pugh No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    75
    Location:
    Scotland
    I've got a couple of older lenses here, which i'm looking to sell to get another more usable lens. My older tamron back focuses, and my sigma is poor.

    What's your opinions on the Nikon 18mm-135mm lens? I think it's DX? Any photos or anything like that would be appreciated. Lens distortion? fringing? anything.

    Thanks.
     
  2. sabbath999

    sabbath999 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Messages:
    2,696
    Likes Received:
    62
    Location:
    Missouri
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    IMHO it is very overpriced for what it is... for that money it should have VR on it.

    I have shot it on a friend's camera, and I don't have any images to share, but here is what I know about it.

    It is very sharp, there is a boatload of distortion at the 18 end and color fringing is pretty bad.

    I would MUCH rather spend just a few dollars more and get the 18-105 which is a MUCH better lens with VR on it... OR... even better than that, buy the excellent 18-55 VR and the 55-200 VR and get better lenses across the board. The 55-200 is (within its limitations) as good picture-quality-wise as my $1600 70-200 VR at one eighth of the price.
     
  3. K_Pugh

    K_Pugh No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    75
    Location:
    Scotland
    Thanks.. Yeah I've had a look at some samples with the 18-135mm, fringing is very bad! so I don't think I'll go for it.

    My Tamron 20-40mm SP optically is brilliant! I can't fault it apart from the fact it back focuses quite badly with my Nikon bodies - It's a shame because it does autofocus very quickly and very well in low light, but it just doesn't do it properly :lol:

    I'll have a look at the 18-105mm you mentioned.

    I'll also have a look at the Tamron SP 28-75mm F2.8.. think this one is designed for digital so shouldn't have any focusing issues.
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2008
  4. sabbath999

    sabbath999 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Messages:
    2,696
    Likes Received:
    62
    Location:
    Missouri
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    How about getting the Tamron repaired?
     
  5. iflynething

    iflynething TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,347
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    South Carolina USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I'm using it on my D80. It's a nice lens at wide angle, but vinetting (sp?) is horrible (my opinion) at 135 expecially photographing things in the sky. Some pictures were ruined photographing some remonte control planes over the summer.

    If you can go past that, I don't mind it. The 7.5x zoom is great. You have the zoom AND decent wide angle. Sure do wish it was a 12-135. I haven't seen any major fringing. If you're a pixel peeper, then that migiht be a problem with this lens.

    I'll give a plus on the 18-105, mainly becuase it has the VR. There were some times where I wish I had VR on a lens like this. Most people say, you don't need VR on a lens under 200mm, I say anything over around 80, it can be benefecial

    ~Michael~
     
  6. K_Pugh

    K_Pugh No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    75
    Location:
    Scotland
    It's not a fault with the lens, works fine on my 35mm SLR. It's a common problem using older 3rd party lenses on newer bodies apparently.
     
  7. K_Pugh

    K_Pugh No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    75
    Location:
    Scotland
    I've also had a look at the 55-200 VR as recommended, I'm going tomorrow to try find one.. might even trade in the tamron and then buy the 18-55 VR at a later date. I have a 35-80 i can use for 'wider' angles in the meantime.
     
  8. iflynething

    iflynething TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,347
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    South Carolina USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    If you MEANT to put get the 18-55, don't waste your money. I don't think VR is needed for that lens, at all

    ~Michael~
     
  9. K_Pugh

    K_Pugh No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    75
    Location:
    Scotland
    Yeah I've never been fussed about VR myself before. I've heard good things bout the 55-200VR though, especially for the price. A good wide zoom at a later date i can think about it's just, as said above, the 18-55 seems like an obvious choice.
     
  10. passerby

    passerby TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Messages:
    591
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I think the 16-85 VR is the cream of entry level zoom now. If the focal length is suits you, you can have a good look on it. But it is not cheap, almost the price of 18-200.
     
  11. iflynething

    iflynething TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,347
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    South Carolina USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    That's why I was saying save the money. That 18-55 VR is way to expensive. Unless it's really, really, REALLy low light, I do not see a point in VR in a 18-55mm lens.

    Also, there's about a $550 difference between the 18-55 VR and 18-200. I assume you meant the 55-200? (which sells for $199 from Wolf Camera)

    ~Michael~
     
  12. K_Pugh

    K_Pugh No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    75
    Location:
    Scotland
    Well I'm just back home with..

    The 55-200 VR.

    Initial thoughts: Glad I got it! I can see even from the LCD that it's a sharper lens than my Sigma 70-300 was. It is a bit slow to AF but the Sigma used to hunt so it's come and go type of thing. Seems like a solid little lens, more compact than I expected.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

135mm nikon wide open distortion