1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

18-55 afs (non VR) vs 18-70

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by Randy, Aug 10, 2009.

  1. I am in a go light mode and i'm thinking about getting an 18-55 (non VR) to save another 1/2 lb of gear from leaving the 18-70 home.
    I actually got an 18-55 with my d40 but sold it w/o even using it once

    18-55 are just $105 new

    anybody shoot both and have an opinion ?

  2. The 18-55mm is a sharp little lens and is great for a light kit. I never used a 18-70mm, but would think its about the same IQ as the 18-55mm.
  3. SP77


    Jun 4, 2007
    Rockville, MD
    The 18-55 + VR if you get that version and 1:3.2 close focus make it a winner for me as far as these lightweight kit lenses go. I've taken just this lens on travel for lightweight (VR and non-VR versions) and have gotten a ton of great photos. It's sharp in the center wide-open at all apertures, although stop down to f/5.6 or f/8 if you want the best border/corner performance. I've never shot with the 18-70.
  4. I love my 18-70mm. It's my travel light lens, when I go on a trip. Most of my Buenos Aires series, was shot with the 18-70mm. Excellent IQ for the price. I had and 18-55 (non-VR) and did not care for it. Sold it here and replaced it with the 18-70 (also bought here).
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 15, 2017
  5. LynnTX


    Jun 23, 2008
    I have used both before I gave my 18-55 to my son. I think the image quality is pretty close, but I would give the edge to the 18-70. That is the one that is usually on my D40 because I have confidence in it. It's also a slightly faster lens. Maybe some samples are different, I don't know.

    If you are going for weight reduction like you said- then the images of the 18-55 will probably be acceptable. I shot of lot of pics on a Mexico vacation with just the 18-55 as my primary lens and was quite happy with the results. On that trip I also shot some with the 55-200 (non vr) and was also quite satisfied with those pics. Those 2 lenses make a very light kit with a D40. Thats one of the things that attracted me to the D40 in the first place.
  6. The sweet spot of the 18-55 seems to be in the middle of the range and at the middle apertures just as you'd expect. I tested one to dedicate to my IR body and decided to get the VR version instead. I'm sure I would have been pleased with non-VR version.

    I can't speak to the 18-70 except that the only one I ever shot was about 3 frames for a test and thought it was soft. As you well know, it gets consistently good reviews. For your IR body I've read that it might create hotspots.
  7. Randy, we're talking light compared to what? I mean the 70-200 is light compared to some of the stuff you seem to use.

    I had and used the 18-70 for a few years, my son has the 18-55 with his D40. I've never done a direct comparison but the 18-70 is certainly a better built and faster lens. If I had the 18-70 I don't think I would run out and get 18-55 (type I, II, or VR)
  8. My 35 1.8 is my "light" lens for travel.
  9. Masa


    Feb 27, 2006
    San Jose, CA
    Long time ago, back in the D70/D50 days, I compared my 18-70 against my friends 18-55. The 18-55 had less distortion at the wide end. That's pretty much all I remember, because the difference was significant.
  10. Weston


    Dec 29, 2008
    Springfield, OR
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.