Nikon 18-105mm VR

[North West Tom]

Thinking of getting this as an upgrade from my (D40) kit lens. Just wondering if anyone has/had this lens. Do you recommend?

[flat-planedCrank]

Never used it but there is a Nikkor 18-105mm review here.

[andy-xr]

Non AF-S isnt it??

• Edit - take that back after I googled it!

I've looked at one as a general walkabout, image quality seemed *OK* but not overly special from my non scientific tests of 3 quick snaps

Edited by andy-xr on Tuesday 30th November 20:26

[ian in lancs]

Top lens!

[RobDickinson]

In my limited use of it I found it OK (on a D90) , not bad but not stellar, soft towards the longer end wide open.

[GlenMH]

RobDickinson said:

In my limited use of it I found it OK (on a D90) , not bad but not stellar, soft towards the longer end wide open.

Agreed on both counts. As a flexible walkabout lens it is good but I am moving to a couple of primes next as I tend to use it at about 3 focal lengths: about 18mm, about 35mm and at the 105 end - which is covered by another longer zoom.

[dblack1]

My brother in law has this lens (he bought it with a D90). Its a great lens, but if you have the 18-55mm VR (which most people bought with their D40 except without the VR) I would look into getting the 55-200mm VR instead (unless you already have it). I have compared side by side both of these combonations and the 18-105 is more comfortable to use (it has a bigger zoom, its bigger, and the focus ring is at the back of the lens instead of the front), but its picture quality is only marginally better than the other combination, and it uses larger 67mm filters.

To clarify and review what I've said, the 18-105 is a great lens that is comfortable to use, BUT unless that small change in picture quality is worth that extra money, I would not recommend this lens. I would rather see you buy something that has a better bang for your buck.

Edited by dblack1 on Wednesday 1st December 05:40

Edited by dblack1 on Wednesday 1st December 05:41