Substitution to kit lens - beginner

[darkblue-x]

I have taken quite the liking for photography and would still consider myself a beginner, perhaps beginner *plus* at best.
I have tried a couple of different cameras and the one I liked the best as a beginner with the value and features is the NIKON D5500. Alright! So I have decided on the body.

I've tried the kit lens that comes with the D5500, I do not like the distance it can reach and would prefer 18mm-XXXmm or something alike.
I don't have much interest in purchasing multiple lenses at this juncture.
What I had taken a look at is the NIKKOR 18-140mm lens...

If anyone could provide their thoughts on my choice or suggest another viable option for substitute to kit lens with similar range would be much appreciated. I'm also really unfamiliar with what differentiates seemingly the same lens in description to another after what range it states. Things like ED, AF-S, VR, F/3.5-5.5G, etc. What makes it that nearly identical described lenses may have a $400 difference on the same website?

Thanks.

 

[snowbear]

The kit lenses tend to have a variable aperture, meaning the amount of light entering the lens will change (be less) as you zoom, where the better lenses have a constant aperture. The build on them is typically less than the more expensive lenses - things like the number of glass elements, lens coatings, distortion, etc.

 

[astroNikon]

Prices can vary greatly from a "kit" basic lens up to a professional lens, which vary themselves.

VR is Vibration Reduction. There are lenses with and without this feature; same lens, just with or without which can push the price a couple hundred more.

AF-S lenses that have AF-S (or the newer faster AF-P) has a focusing motor built INTO the lens itself. Your D5500 requires this feature for Autofocus. Other "AF" and "AF-D" lenses do NOT have a built in focuser and require the camera body to have it. The d7x00 series and higher have a built-in focus motor to support AutoFocus on these AF-D lenses; they typically are much cheaper than the equivalent AF-S lens.

The "G" is basically the lens will only control the aperture electronically. Meaning a dial around the lens does not exist to manually change the Aperture. Most AF/AF-D lenses have a manual aperture capability - you can do it manually or let the camera control it. Most AF-S lenses are electronic only.

The "F/3.5-5.5" is the aperture. basically at 18mm the aperture will be f/3.5 and at say 55mm the aperture will be at f/5.5. On higher level or professional lenses it can be f/1.8 or f/2.8 the entire length of the lens. Thus a consistent aperture, which if in an automode won't change the ISO or shutter speed in relation to your focal length of the lense.

A professional lens can be thousands of dollars.
Where as an equivalent entry level, basic lens can be a couple hundred.

 

[Solarflare]

Quite frankly I recomment the AF-S 35mm f1.8 DX (the DX is important, theres a non-DX which is twice as expensive and big, as well as inferior in build and optics) and zooming with your feet. The f1.8 maximum aperture and the much less glas in the lens gives you a lot more light to work with than with any of these dark zooms, which btw have to be stopped down for decent performance as well, plus its cheap and surprisingly well build.

If you absolutely have to get a superzoom, I recomment a used AF-S 18-200mm f3.5-5.6 VR DX. This (and the full frame variant AF-S 28-300mm f3.5-5.6 VR) is possibly the best superzoom in existence; no strong weaknesses at any focal length and even quite pleaseant rendering overall. More importantly its availbe for stupid cheap on the used market now, because this lens has been around for quite some while and nobody with experience really wants a superzoom.

I would also recomment a used D7100 over a D5500. Its better in every respect - better autofocus, better metering, better controls, better build, weathersealing & dual card slot, and its photographically complete, i.e. it supports "advanced" (IMHO actually pretty basic) features like HSS or the availability of a battery grip. The only advantage of the D5500 over that is the flipscreen (which surely is awesome to have) and less weight. I dont know if they are still available new, but even then they've been very cheap.

 

[Derrel]

Yes, look into the 18-135, the newer 18-140, or the used 18-200mm; all three have the greater range you'd most likely want to have.

 

[darkblue-x]

Quite frankly I recomment the AF-S 35mm f1.8 DX (the DX is important, theres a non-DX which is twice as expensive and big, as well as inferior in build and optics) and zooming with your feet. The f1.8 maximum aperture and the much less glas in the lens gives you a lot more light to work with than with any of these dark zooms, which btw have to be stopped down for decent performance as well, plus its cheap and surprisingly well build.

If you absolutely have to get a superzoom, I recomment a used AF-S 18-200mm f3.5-5.6 VR DX. This (and the full frame variant AF-S 28-300mm f3.5-5.6 VR) is possibly the best superzoom in existence; no strong weaknesses at any focal length and even quite pleaseant rendering overall. More importantly its availbe for stupid cheap on the used market now, because this lens has been around for quite some while and nobody with experience really wants a superzoom.

I would also recomment a used D7100 over a D5500. Its better in every respect - better autofocus, better metering, better controls, better build, weathersealing & dual card slot, and its photographically complete, i.e. it supports "advanced" (IMHO actually pretty basic) features like HSS or the availability of a battery grip. The only advantage of the D5500 over that is the flipscreen (which surely is awesome to have) and less weight. I dont know if they are still available new, but even then they've been very cheap.

Update: I had purchased a D3300 for $300 CAD, which was a great deal as it was nearly brand new.
I don't have that much money that I can dedicate to photography at this time so my limits would make your suggestions unavailable to me.

I did however just get BestBuy to price match Amazon on the AF-S 35mm Prime f/1.8, with a gift card I had the total came to $165 CAD. I'm glad to be lucking out like this as this lens seemed like a "must".

The only affordable option from what I see on telephoto is AF-S 55-200mm. It will be a feasible purchase at a later time and I heard that the quality is okay on it. Coming at a literal 1/3 of the price of the 18-200mm, I may just have to stick with it as a more cost-effective alternative.

Feel free to provide any feedback or any suggestions. They would be greatly appreciated.
I will be posting other topics as well as I'm still trying to learn the basics.