To those d7000 owners who have dumped their 18-105

[pixmedic]

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.

we have the nikkor 70-300 VRII and it is a great lens. we only use it maybe once a year or so...but its a great lens. we also have the 18-105, and while it IS a pretty decent lens, it generally sits in the closet in favor of faster lenses.

 

[ceeboy14]

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****.

Yeah, I still do when I want a wide angle lens since I am not particularly interested in investing in a 12-24. I also shoot this when I know I am going to be faced with a lot of different shooting situations and don't want to carry my whole kit with me...you know, just toodling about the neighborhood. You can call all the BS you want. It may be in a plastic housing but the glass is pretty decent. There's a guy on one of the other forums I frequent who uses an old D70 and its kit lens; his work is freakin' superb. The best glass in the world won't make a schlock photographer a better or even great photographer, but a good photographer with a so-so lens will kick butt every time, and that's no BS.

Just sold the 24-70 and bought some lights, etc.

 

[greybeard]

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****.

Yeah, I still do when I want a wide angle lens since I am not particularly interested in investing in a 12-24. I also shoot this when I know I am going to be faced with a lot of different shooting situations and don't want to carry my whole kit with me...you know, just toodling about the neighborhood. You can call all the BS you want. It may be in a plastic housing but the glass is pretty decent. There's a guy on one of the other forums I frequent who uses an old D70 and its kit lens; his work is freakin' superb. The best glass in the world won't make a schlock photographer a better or even great photographer, but a good photographer with a so-so lens will kick butt every time, and that's no BS.

Just sold the 24-70 and bought some lights, etc.

Much like a good guitar player can take a cheap guitar and still make it sound good. But, a bad guitar player can't make a great guitar sound good. Snap-on tools won't make a hack into a a master mechanic any more than Harbor Freight tools will turn a master mechanic into a hack. As you all probably know, there are a lot of bad guitar players with vintage Gibsons and Fenders and there are a lot of guys that you wouldn't let oil your wheel barrel with Snap-on tools. They just enjoy owning and using the premium stuff.

 

[TheLost]

Yeah, I still do when I want a wide angle lens since I am not particularly interested in investing in a 12-24. I also shoot this when I know I am going to be faced with a lot of different shooting situations and don't want to carry my whole kit with me...you know, just toodling about the neighborhood. You can call all the BS you want. It may be in a plastic housing but the glass is pretty decent. There's a guy on one of the other forums I frequent who uses an old D70 and its kit lens; his work is freakin' superb. The best glass in the world won't make a schlock photographer a better or even great photographer, but a good photographer with a so-so lens will kick butt every time, and that's no BS.

Just sold the 24-70 and bought some lights, etc.

The kit lens on the D70 was the 18-70mm .. the same lens I've posted about multiple times in this thread... just thought i'd point that out...

 

[daggah]

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

Sometimes, light weight and a versatile focal length range are more valuable than an f/2.8 aperture.