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

[gryffinwings]

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.

I shoot both because it's convenient, since my wife likes to take a lot of my pictures for Facebook, which means I have to have better camera settings when I shoot, which might mean I don't need to edit some pictures. So auto distortion control can be useful.

 

[Solarflare]

Auto Distortion costs picture quality, thats why I usually have it disabled.

Its good to have if you need absolutely straight lines, though.

 

[Alan92RTTT]

If you use lightroom you can set it to detect your lens and automatically apply lens correction on import.

I like lightroom a lot more than viewNX.

 

[greybeard]

After reading all these posts and from my own experience, I don't think 18-55 to 18-105 is really worth the bucks. If you are going to go to the trouble of upgrading, get something that is (1) better image quality (2) better build quality. The 18-105 seems to be pretty much the same IQ and same BQ, just a little longer reach. I use the 18-55 ....55-200 combination and I'm real happy with it.

 

[fjrabon]

After reading all these posts and from my own experience, I don't think 18-55 to 18-105 is really worth the bucks. If you are going to go to the trouble of upgrading, get something that is (1) better image quality (2) better build quality. The 18-105 seems to be pretty much the same IQ and same BQ, just a little longer reach. I use the 18-55 ....55-200 combination and I'm real happy with it.

I thought the 18-105 was maybe a very small tick better in build quality. Mostly because of the non rotating front element on the 18-105, which the rotating front element on the 18-55 drives me crazy.

 

[Infidel]

The difference in sharpness between one kit lens and another is likely so minimal and insignificant that you'll never notice. Don't waste your money...practice taking sharper photos in the first place.

 

[Alan92RTTT]

Given how the manual focus on the 18-55 "works", taking a sharper photo with it is harder than it sounds

 

[fjrabon]

Given how the manual focus on the 18-55 "works", taking a sharper photo with it is harder than it sounds

who manual focuses with a kit lens anyway though?

 

[hopdaddy]

I will sing the praises of the 18-105 kit lens ........Even for wildlife ! You just need to get close ! If I didn't have this lens ,I would buy it .



Photoed with a kit lens-18-105 mm



Wild Trukey's Of Georgia by Clyde Hopper/23-30june@Belize, on Flickr



Sun City by Clyde Hopper/23-30june@Belize, on Flickr

 

[fjrabon]

I will sing the praises of the 18-105 kit lens ........Even for wildlife ! You just need to get close ! If I didn't have this lens ,I would buy it .

Doesn't that sort of defeat the purpose of an 18-105 for wildlife, if you have to get close? Sure, it was pretty good from about 35mm-60mm, but so is the 18-55mm.

 

[Infidel]

Given how the manual focus on the 18-55 "works", taking a sharper photo with it is harder than it sounds

I'm not sure I understand your comment. By my comment, I meant to say that there are ways to get sharper images with a kit lens that largely encompass technique and know-how. For instance, select the appropriate cross-type af sensor and focus on the appropriate part of the subject, properly expose the subject, use an optimal combination of aperture, shutter speed and iso for the conditions, learn how to hold the camera properly and brace your stance, use a tripod when appropriate, learn how to properly apply sharpening in post, etc.

Until these techniques are mastered, buying a sharper lens will probably not result in sharper pictures.

 

[snowbear]

Also, the 35mm/1.8 DX is the smallest DX prime.

Not quite. There is the 10.5mm. Yes, it's a fisheye, but is also a prime.

 

[Solarflare]

Alan92RTTT talks about this: Nikkor AF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 G DX VR :

The very broad rubberized zoom ring feels reasonably smooth. Due to cost cutting measurements there isn't really a dedicated focus ring - you simply use the slightly fluted front portion of the inner lens tube instead (or, if mounted, the hood). The target audience for this lens will probably not mind but this is surely an annoyance for more serious users - manual focusing is quite a nightmare. If you touch the focus ring the viewfinder image tends so shake significantly because of the wobbling of the inner lens tube.

The 18-55mm focusses nicely as long as you focus with the automatic. If you try it manually, though, the cheap build of the lens makes it impossible to do it with much precision.

Also, the 35mm/1.8 DX is the smallest DX prime.

Not quite. There is the 10.5mm. Yes, it's a fisheye, but is also a prime.

Well ok, thats true.

 

[greybeard]

After reading all these posts and from my own experience, I don't think 18-55 to 18-105 is really worth the bucks. If you are going to go to the trouble of upgrading, get something that is (1) better image quality (2) better build quality. The 18-105 seems to be pretty much the same IQ and same BQ, just a little longer reach. I use the 18-55 ....55-200 combination and I'm real happy with it.

I thought the 18-105 was maybe a very small tick better in build quality. Mostly because of the non rotating front element on the 18-105, which the rotating front element on the 18-55 drives me crazy.

They are both plastic mount which makes them the bottom of the line as far as BQ goes (imho). But, bottom of the line is just fine with me as that is what I own and use.

 

[gryffinwings]

I don't get your guys when your taking about build quality.1. Build quality of Nikon lens are excellent.2. If the build quality of the lens wasn't good then IMHO, the lens wouldn't be very good altogether.3. Even though there is a lot of plastic, doesn't mean build quality is crap, plastic is good to make a lens light weight.4. Sure plastic is always the ideal material for every lens, but it's a cost saving measure, it's lighter, but shouldn't be construed as been worse quality then other lens.5. IMHO, the only advantage with metal and other material other than plastic is that they are more sturdy.For example, the D90 is made of plastic, a lot of people buy it because it's a really good camera, it's not crappy build quality either.