To those d7000 owners who have dumped their 18-105

greybeard · Aug 13, 2012

I'm not real happy with my 18-105, it seems to mis-focus quite often at close range. I used a 18-55 earlier and it was much better at close range. If you have replaced your 18-105, what did you replace it with?

Tee · Aug 13, 2012

I got the 18-105 when I bought the D90. Like you, I found the 18-105 to be soft and of poor image quality. I replaced it with the Tamron 28-75 2.8.

sleist · Aug 13, 2012

Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8.

Kept the 18-105 for a while because it made a nice travel kit with the 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR.
Just gave it to my son because it works better for him than his 18-55 kit lens.
He uses the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro for close work.

jamesbjenkins · Aug 13, 2012

Got the 18-105 with my D90 kit in Feb 2008. I made it work until I could afford a pro quality zoom. Bought the 24-70 f/2.8 first and slowly built the collection from there. 4 years later, I have all the lenses I "need" right now.

Patience is key when you're starting out. Always wait to get the VERY best lens you can possibly afford. If you treat your lenses well, they can typically be resold several years later for 80% or more of their original value.

domu221 · Aug 14, 2012

I have a D7000. I got it with an 18-105mm kit lens but I sold it and just used my D3100's 18-55mm VR. Compared to the 18-105mm, the 18-55mm doesnt have ED Glass and has a moving front element (people say that this reduces lens build quality).

But, I also replaced my 18-55mm with a 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 and I am very happy with it. The 16-85mm is what I use for all around in my D7000 (and 35mm f/1.8G for my D3100 for walkaround).

LizardKing · Aug 14, 2012

It really depends on what you want... will it be your only lens? It also depends on your budget... But I didn't buy the kit lens and went directly to the Nikon 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G... I'm really happy about the decision

... It's a great lens and covers a good range of photography although I wish it was a little wide, specially with the crop factor of the D7000. But I like it!

Of course, if you have the money, go for something like the 24-70mm f/2.8... But if you can't afford it, then the 28-300mm sounds good to me.

Anyway, wait to see feedback from more experience photographers... I've only had the D7000 por less than a year.

greybeard · Aug 14, 2012

domu221 said:
I have a D7000. I got it with an 18-105mm kit lens but I sold it and just used my D3100's 18-55mm VR. Compared to the 18-105mm, the 18-55mm doesnt have ED Glass and has a moving front element (people say that this reduces lens build quality).

But, I also replaced my 18-55mm with a 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 and I am very happy with it. The 16-85mm is what I use for all around in my D7000 (and 35mm f/1.8G for my D3100 for walkaround).

The 16-85 is kinda of what I'm looking at, I need the 16 end from time to time, I don't need anything longer than 85 etc on the long end most of the time. How close does the 16-85 focus? I like to get up close to things.

worrptangl · Aug 14, 2012

I went with the Sigma 17-70 OS. I was on a budget and really did my research, and decided that this was the better choice for me. I have had no issues with the lens for the few months I have had it. It focuses really close also. The only thing that bother me about it is the focus ring rotates and no FTM, but the HSM is quick and quiet.

domu221 · Aug 15, 2012

greybeard said:
The 16-85 is kinda of what I'm looking at, I need the 16 end from time to time, I don't need anything longer than 85 etc on the long end most of the time. How close does the 16-85 focus? I like to get up close to things.

It's about 1.3 feet / 0.38 meters for any of its focal length (as per the Nikon website). You'll enjoy this lens and it's metal mount! The VRII is most useful in long focal lengths.

However, if you really plan to use the wide end on most of your shootings with this lens, why not consider the 10-24mm? Granted that it doesn't have VR like the 16-85, you'd get better images with it... (then you can buy a telephoto lens in the future if you really need it).

rgregory1965 · Aug 15, 2012

Dumped mine for whats below in my Sig

greybeard · Feb 1, 2013

I'm back to this again. I had the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 VC for a while but it just wasn't my cup of tea. I like the 17-50 range but, the IQ at f/2.8 and noisy AF motor just didn't float my boat. I'm still looking at the Nikon 16-85 but, what does it have to offer other than a metal mount and VRii over my current 18-105? Also, any comments on the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, it reviews better than anything in that range.

Patriot · Feb 1, 2013

Still trying to dump mines. I did stop using it and started to only use primes and the Vivitar 70-210 3.5 is the only zoom I would use now. Most of my lenses are M42 mounts.

ratssass · Feb 1, 2013

I still have my 18-105.I never thought it was that bad of a lens.I've since bought the 70-200 sigma,24-70 sigma,and 10-24 Nikon.When I get rid of the 18-105,it will be with a body,if I get rid of it.Right now,it goes well with a D200 I picked up.I think the 18-105 gets a bum rap too often.....this is at 18mm SOOC....

Solarflare · Feb 1, 2013

The 18-105mm is "softer" with closeups than the 18-55mm because the 18-55mm allows to focus closer.

I've been told the 18-105mm is quite nice as long as you can step it down to f/8.

daggah · Feb 1, 2013

I have a 17-55 2.8 but I still have my 18-105. I like the flexibility of the focal range. I've gotten some good shots with it too and I haven't ever felt like it was giving me any kind of focus troubles.