To those d7000 owners who have dumped their 18-105

ceeboy14 · Feb 1, 2013

I've had my 18-105 since I got the D7000 and contrary to what a lot of people say or think about the lens, as far as I am concerned, it does pretty d*mn well. I'd say at least 50% of my posts on thi sforum were made with the 18-105. I recently posted this http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/nature-wildlife/315776-hey-room-one-more.html and it was shot with the 18-105, as was http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/black-white-gallery/315770-hunkering-down.html I don't exactly know how much sharper you need...and I have the 24-70 2.8 and the 70-200 2.8 and just about all the primes...

Mully · Feb 1, 2013

I have an 18-80 Nikon that i like a lot .... slight distortion at each end but it is sharp

CouncilmanDoug · Feb 1, 2013

I don't have a d7000 but I have a 18-105. It only gets use now when I need a wide angle. I liked it though, I just couldn't deal with how slow it is, I have 3 primes that cover the length from 35 to 135 much better, I need to just sell it and get a 20mm or something. But for what it is it's a great lens

greybeard · Feb 1, 2013

I don't think the IQ quality of the 18-105 is the issue, it is more of the speed and build quality that turns me and others off.

Carlos_Gouveia · Feb 1, 2013

I replaced it with two lens, Nikon 55-200mm VR AF-S f/4-5.6G ED and the sweet Nikkor 50mm 1.4D

greybeard · Feb 2, 2013

I just did a few rather un scientific tests comparing my 18-105 against my Tokina 12-24 @ q 18mm f/5.6 my 35mm @ 35mm f/5.6, my 50mm @ 50mm f/5.6 and my 105 @ 105mm f/8..the 18-105 did a lot better than I expected and I really can't fault the IQ at all. At this point I am just going to have to put up with the plastic mount and slow speed. The range and IQ are just too good

daggah · Feb 3, 2013

Well, obviously, plastic mounts aren't ideal, but I'm not sure why they'd be a complaint. How does a plastic mount realistically effect usage? Are you trying to sling your camera around by the lens or something?

greybeard · Feb 3, 2013

daggah said:
Well, obviously, plastic mounts aren't ideal, but I'm not sure why they'd be a complaint. How does a plastic mount realistically effect usage? Are you trying to sling your camera around by the lens or something?

I have never broken a single piece of my gear in 40 years of usage. To say that I baby my equipment would be an understatement. I think that I look at my gear as (1) a tool and (2) as a work of art in its' own right. From a performance point of view the 18-105 and 18-55 perform as good as or better than anything in their speed/zoom range. But, from a aesthetic point of view, the 18-105 and 18-55 just scream cheap.

480sparky · Feb 3, 2013

Funny, but of all the shots I've posted here using my 18-105, I've never had anyone say "Oohhhh, ick..... it was taken with one of the crappy, cheesy 18-105 plastic-mount garbage-can-with-glass-in-it kit lenses."

greybeard · Feb 4, 2013

The quality of the pictures or the handling characteristics have never been much of an issue for me with the 18-105. I just don't care for the build materials and flimsy feel of the thing. I wanted to know what others who have felt similarly about the lens, had replaced it with. Using a camera to make images is a lot like using an instrument to make music. If one finds a particular lens or guitar unsatisfying to use/play, for whatever reason, they are not going to do their best work. And if you think photographers are gear nuts, you should meet some professional musicians I know. They have sheds full of equipment and only play one guitar and amplifier at a time. Many of you have given me some good suggestions and today I pulled the trigger on a Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 G AF-S DX ED VR. I do not expect to see any difference in the images it produces compared to the 18-105. It does however feel much better and has a metal mount. I now have my eye on a Nikon 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR. I think that will do me for a while.

rgregory1965 · Feb 4, 2013

Sigma 17-50 is ultra sharp and it has no issues with focus.....I love it

greybeard · Feb 5, 2013

I seriously considered the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS but, in the end I prefer to stay with Nikon OEM.

TheLost · Feb 5, 2013

I'd look for a good used copy of the Nikon 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED (KEH has a EX+ used on for $140 right now). You'll give up VR and 70-105mm but you'll gain build quality.

ghache · Feb 5, 2013

ceeboy14 said:
I've had my 18-105 since I got the D7000 and contrary to what a lot of people say or think about the lens, as far as I am concerned, it does pretty d*mn well. I'd say at least 50% of my posts on thi sforum were made with the 18-105. I recently posted this http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/nature-wildlife/315776-hey-room-one-more.html and it was shot with the 18-105, as was http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/black-white-gallery/315770-hunkering-down.html I don't exactly know how much sharper you need...and I have the 24-70 2.8 and the 70-200 2.8 and just about all the primes...

you have these primes and those 2 professional lens and all you shoot with that plastic lens? i call bull****.

ceeboy14 · Feb 5, 2013

I keeping laughing my arse off each time I hear the words, "build quality." Take care with your equipment and it isn't an issue. I had 24 students in three classes twice a year using the 18-55's which were as crappily built as a lens could get. In 8 years of daily use, I had one lens break at the mount base. It was infinitely cheaper to replace than fix...$100 on eBay, I think. My student's parents signed a, "you break it, you replace it" document which pretty much assured me safe use. But still, they were high school students. I've had the 18-105 since I got my D7000 and I've never so much as had any issue with the lens...but hey, I wipe it down regularly, clean the lens regularly, keep it in a padded case when not in use, and when on the camera, take decent care not to bang it into walls...

Take care of your equipment and in most cases build quality is the least of your issues.