Need a All-around Nikon Lense with a FUTURE

[sjmurray]

<p>A simple thing would be to get a different 18-70, or try a few of them in a store. Some of them are very sharp. There is apparently a lot of sample variation with this lens. Mine is as sharp or sharper than my older classic primes except for the 50mm lenses, but it is close to them as well. I shoot with mine wide open most of the time in available light. Even at 70mm it amazes me how sharp it is. The 18-70 is not expensive, and it is light ,fast, and quiet in operation. I miss having f 2.8 but I just use higher iso on my D80. </p>

[michael_kegan1]

<p>The more I use the 17-55 DX, 2.8 on my D300 themore I love it. It costs less than half of the 24-70 and I think it is somewhat lighter. I would pick a good used one up an use that until I swiched to DX.</p>

[Ali_334]

<p>I can't believe all the comments I got. I'm still reading. Thank you to all for their input.<br>

Ali</p>

 

[rasong]

<p>Here. if you dont mind the heavy. then go for 24-70 and 70-200. you will have no question for sharpness and any other technical you can think of.</p>

<p>if you want light and you really hate heavy . i think you can get 18-200 VR. this lens is very sharp and usefull as well. however. it has many draw back issue as well beside it convenient.<br>

I recommend you 24-70 and 70-200 because it has a future with your next fullframe body. and it is top quality of Nikon zoom. you can see compare in internet. 24-70 also no bad for macro photo too.<br>

Cheer ! i wish you have what you like !</p>

[Ali_334]

<p>Steve, you wrote:</p>

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=525441">Steve J Murray</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub7.gif" alt="" title="Subscriber" /> </a> , Jul 08, 2009; 05:28 p.m.</p>

 

<p>A simple thing would be to get a different 18-70, or try a few of them in a store. Some of them are very sharp. There is apparently a lot of sample variation with this lens. Mine is as sharp or sharper than my older classic primes except for the 50mm lenses, but it is close to them as well. I shoot with mine wide open most of the time in available light. Even at 70mm it amazes me how sharp it is. The 18-70 is not expensive, and it is light ,fast, and quiet in operation. I miss having f 2.8 but I just use higher iso on my D80.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>You know I was thinking the same. My pictures are not fuzzy by any means. Maybe I am just asking too much. I keep wondering if I pony up $700 for a 16-85 VR if my pictures would improve significantly. There's no way to tell until I buy it.<br>

Look at this image on my blog: http://torkzadeh.com/node/500<br>

or This one: http://torkzadeh.com/node/523 or the one at the bottom of this page: http://torkzadeh.com/node/466<br>

I guess hard to judge because files are optimized for web and are not high quality jpegs.</p>

 

[anthony_bez]

<blockquote>

<p>I keep wondering if I pony up $700 for a 16-85 VR if my pictures would improve significantly. There's no way to tell until I buy it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Unless you have a bad copy of the 18-70mm or need VR. Your pictures will not improve significantly with a 16-85.</p>

[alvinyap]

<p><strong>I keep wondering if I pony up $700 for a 16-85 VR if my pictures would improve significantly. There's no way to tell until I buy it.</strong><br>

I don't have your lens, but I doubt it. Went from 18-55VR to the 16-85 and while there is *some* improvement, don't count on it too much. Its more about the focal length than improvement in IQ for me though.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>I keep wondering if I pony up $700 for a 16-85 VR if my pictures would improve significantly.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well, I have no doubt about this: it will not. In fact, no lens, regardless of how expensive it may be, will suddenly improve your pictures significantly.</p>

<p>Ali, you already have a good lens, and the images in your blog are already quite decent.</p>