simon_bradley

<p>Thanks, I forgot to merntion earlier that my original 18-55 is broken which is why, ideally, I want a single lens for most shots, and chosing a 55-upwards is not an option at this time. Thanks again for all the advice.</p>

<p>Thanks guys.<br>

After careful consideration and a bit more reading around. I'm going to go for the Nikon 18-105VR for now, and see whether the 105 goes as close as I really need. I suspect I'll find for the sort of shots I take I really don't need to go any further in than that.<br>

A quick look on eBay suggests there are many 'as new' models for around the 100-120 mark, because of it being included as the stock lens on the 7000 models.<br>

Thanks for your help, and I'm looking forward to taking a greater, and less-specific, read through these threads now that I've found them!</p>

<p>Morning guys, newbie here, so thanks in advance to anyone who offers help.<br>

I have a D3100 for which I want to purchase an 18-200 lens. I'm nothing more than an enthusiastic amateur, and a lot of my pictures are little more than holiday/travel/family, but I do like producing good pictures in those categories.<br>

I'm really look for advice between whether to spend my cash on a NEW Tamrom/Sigma type lens with the security of a warranty it offers, or a 2nd HAND Nikon VR (can't justify the spend of a VRII, but reports Ive read suggest thats not much better than the VR anyway), realising that will be a good few years old.<br>

The overall cost/sell on value is pretty irrelevant, so my question is really whether I am likely to see better quality images from a 6-8 year old Nikon VR lens or from a brand new Tamron or Sigma (and which out of those two brnads anyone would recommend ?)<br>

Once again, thanks in advance<br>

Si</p>

<p> </p>