Replacing Kit lens with a "Good" normal zoom

[superinc]

<p>Thank you all for your responses and incite.</p>

<p>I wanted to have my cake and eat too. <br>

I found the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC OS HSM Macro on paper to have everything I want , Better quality, wider range, larger aperture, OS. To boot its cheaper(hope not a get what you pay for deal) but has good reviews. best of all BestBuy carries online as they usually have a very limited selection, I can use my 500$ Store credit!! and return it no question ask if I don't like it for whatever reason.</p>

[simon_hickie1]

<p>I have the 16-85mm on a D5000 at the moment. High ISO is excellent (better than my D300). I had the Tamron 17-50mm. AF was too slow and twitchy for my needs so I sold it. I'm tempted by the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8, but found my Tamron equivalent too short at the long end. The Sigma 17-70mm suggestion is also sound if you want an extra stop, but I do like my 16-85mm.</p>

[jeremy_jones3]

<p>I can tell you that you will not be disappointed with the Sigma 17-70. I bought this lens last March after going through much of the same deliberation. From the moment I put it on my D90 I have taken it off maybe twice. Since I shoot mostly landscapes and portraits it is definitely the most ideal. And you can't beat the price. It's got a solid feel to it and the image quality is outstanding. Happy shooting!</p>

[cherubinphotography]

<p>Okay, I'll toss in my two cents as well.... I owned the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and replaced it with the Nikon 17-55 f2.8. The image quality on the Tamron was excellent but it would sometimes miss focus. The Nikon is also faster focusing.</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<blockquote>

<p>"....You always need the larger aperture."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Craig, how can you justify that statement? Your comparison with scanning MF is a complete non-sequiter argument and doesn't explain anything.</p>

<p>We already have cameras with 20 times the ISO sensitivity that you could possibly squeeze out of film ..... and counting! Which is why f/4 ~ f/5.6 zooms are now commonplace and viable bits of kit. When we were stuck with 100 ISO film for "quality" (hah!) and 400 ISO film for when it got dim, <em>then</em> those lenses would have had no place in our gadget bags. And we'd have killed for today's mega-stable VR.</p>

<p>There are only a few situations that demand the shallow depth-of-field that high aperture lenses offer, and true enough, a "kit" lens isn't going to provide it. But for sports, kids and I'd bet 90% of professional work, more depth-of-field rather than less is what's called for. And when you do need that shallow depth of field, I bet your first thought isn't to reach for a mid-range zoom, but a big-a** prime.</p>

[dweezil]

<p>Like Mark said, get a good 2nd hand 18-70.<br>

Yes I know that it's not available new and it has no VR, but quality wise it's very good, not too slow and the auto focus is faster than the af-s on a lot of the newer 'kit' lenses.<br>

Added bonus you can get it for about half of the cost of a 16-85.</p>

 

[superinc]

<p>The D7000 just came in ! , not messing with it much , because is appears to be grey market , no warranty card and it might have to go back.(retailer listed as USA warranty, calling nikon tomorrow to verify) anyways the Sigma is noticealby sharper and faster than kit with D5000, hope it hold true for the D7000 .</p>

<div></div>