Need advice on buying a startup lens instead of default kit lens for Nikon D5100

[yioties]

I think the kit lens gets a bad rap. It's light and produces great images when used properly. Stick with the kit lens and after you learn more buy another lens

 

[ratssass]

I'm biased toward the 18-105.I have faster glass,but the 18-105 remains in heavy rotation.

 

[yioties]

The 18-105 is more versatile than the 18-55 and can be bought relatively cheap used

 

[kylecong]

Not sure if this is the best way, but for me this is the cheapest way:
Save the money and only invest on Full frame pro lens. When you eventually upgrade to full frame body you will be glad that you don't need to replace all the DX lens.

 

[Gavjenks]

Hah yes, I also choose #1 on your list: The kit lens, as the best most efficient lens to do what you said you wanted to do.

 

[Derrel]

I'm biased toward the 18-105.I have faster glass,but the 18-105 remains in heavy rotation.

Back when the D40 was the "hot new camera", I bought my wife a D40 and the 18-105mm and an SB-600 flash. I used her 18-105mm a fair amount on the D40. It was a pretty handy lens in terms of size, weight, and focal length range.

There are a number of lenses that are "better" than the 18-55 is one way or another. Thom Hogan's web site explains some of the lens selection factors, and plusses and minuses, of various lenses.

Nikkor Lens Assessment by Thom Hogan


AND FOR THE SHORT VERSION:Nikon Lens Reviews | byThom | Thom Hogan

 

[apvm]

For the 18-55, I already know 4 guys including myself who has this problem with the lens



luckily, mine is still under warranty and Nikon Canada sent me a new replacement. I sold it recently for $100 and bought an used 18-105 for $150. Can not be happier, I use my D3100 mostly inside school gym or church to take pictures of our school functions for our school's yearbook and newsletter. Sometimes, I can not get too close to the performers due to settings and the 18-55 has its range limitation for my usage. Also I found that the 18-55 is slower to auto focus compare to the 18-105 (inside church or school gym but I may be bias).

By the way I heard that the new 18-55 VRII has solved the above problem.

 

[Designer]

The startup lens that I recommend is the AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 G

It is an excellent startup lens that will serve you well for many years.

After you gain experience with this lens, you may wish to purchase a more specialized lens for the type of photography that you will have moved into at that time.

 

[grafxman]

I would recommend the Sigma 18-250mm macro. I've taken thousands of photos with mine and it's never let me down. Here's one at KEH in your price range:

http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Digital-Non-Mfg-Zoom-Lenses/1/sku-DN094019047980?r=FE

I've never felt the need for a fast lens. Once you learn how to hold the camera steady a photo like this one is not too hard:

IMG_0382 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Note that the shutter speed was 1/25 second. It would be bit sharper had I stopped down the lens a bit instead of having it wide open. Still it's more than adequate for web display. I have many other photos shot with a slow shutter speed in my Henry Plant Museum set and in other sets.

 

[waseq_81]

Thanx guys for all your opinions. I think I will choose between 18-55/ 18-105. Optically which one will be of better quality? I like to hear from u experienced guys out there.

 

[480sparky]

Thanx guys for all your opinions. I think I will choose between 18-55/ 18-105. Optically which one will be of better quality? I like to hear from u experienced guys out there.

That horse race would pretty much be a photo finish (pun intended).

 

[apvm]

If you don't like the 18-55, 18-70 is a good alternative, used price of these two is about the same. If you don't mind plastic mount, the 18-105 is a better choice. I sold my 18-55 recently for $100 and bought a 18-105 for $150, not looking back to the 18-55 but that is just me.

 

[SquarePeg]

I also went from the 18-55 to the 18-105 and found it a great move. Very versatile as an every day lens and nice to have the extra range. If your choice is down to these two, go with the 18-105 for the additional flexibility.

Not to muddy the waters but recently got a used Sigma 17-70 and am loving that. It's faster so better for low light and you can get really close to the subject and still get focus so it is also considered a "macro" lens.

I have the 5100 - refurb from Cameta with 1 year warranty is a good option and will free up some $ toward lenses and a good tripod.

 

[ronlane]

totally. buy the 18-200 and be done with it.

This was my thought of this list.

Thanx guys for all your opinions. I think I will choose between 18-55/ 18-105. Optically which one will be of better quality? I like to hear from u experienced guys out there.

Given just these two choices, I would pick the 18-105mm.

 

[DrHarmony]

I also went for the 18-105 with my kit at purchase. I love the lens, but after one year, I discovered my limitations with it.
If I was to do it all over again, I would get a 16-85 with my camera for the combo discount.
With that said, if you were going to be getting a better lens within a year, (likely) the 18-105 has a better chance to resell than the 18-55.
I see used 18-55 on sale used for months and months where the 18-105 sells in a week.