Decisions Decisions

Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
5,861
Location
Payson AZ
I have a D100, Siggy 18-50mm f/2.8 DC EX, and a SB50DX flash "kit"

I'm thinking of selling the kit to help fund a 17-55mm f/2.8 Nikon.
The D100 just sits because I now have the D300 and it's so much more
of a camera.

I have an 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 I use now on the D300 and like it a lot.
I bought the 18-70mm lens new and would want to keep it just in case.

I guess what I'm beating myself up over is would it be worth selling the Kit for the 17-50mm?
Besides low light performance is the 17-50mm that much better of a lens than the 18-70mm?
There are a lot of reviews out there that think the 18-70mm holds its own against the 17-50mm
but reviews and web sites are a dime a dozen. You can search until you read what you want to hear.
I'm confused. I want the best lens for my D300.

Another problem I have is letting go. I like the D100 a LOT but now it's a dust collector. What to do what to do.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2006
Messages
8,400
Location
LA (Lower Arkansas)
I'd suggest selling the Sigma 18-50, 18-70, and D100. Use the $$$ to buy a used Tamron 17-50.

Take a look at the Tamron 17-50 thread. I just bought one (my 2nd copy) and am loving it. I had the Nikon 17-55, and the Tammy is just as good for about 1/3rd the price...but it doesn't focus quite as fast (it's close). Just spend the time to find one without the built-in motor. I'll post some photos after this weekend.
 
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
5,861
Location
Payson AZ
I'd suggest selling the Sigma 18-50, 18-70, and D100. Use the $$$ to buy a used Tamron 17-50.

Take a look at the Tamron 17-50 thread. I just bought one (my 2nd copy) and am loving it. I had the Nikon 17-55, and the Tammy is just as good for about 1/3rd the price...but it doesn't focus quite as fast (it's close). Just spend the time to find one without the built-in motor. I'll post some photos after this weekend.

I'll look into that thanks for the suggestion.
 
Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
1,956
Location
St. Paul, MN
Given you have a D40 and a D50 (both cameras perform as well if not better than the D100) I see no need to hang on to the D100, though I don't know about AF lenses on the D50, I don't remember if it has an in-body focus motor, I think it does.

I too would sell the Sig 18-50, 18-70, SB-50DX,, and the D100 and put it into other glass. Whether it is a used 17-55 (no reason to buy that one new as the cost savings is significant) a tamron 17-50, or otherwise. Only negative is I doubt your D100 will fetch you very much on the used market. If you do go for a 17-50/55, then you could probably sell your 18-105VR too.
 
Joined
Oct 11, 2007
Messages
2,483
Location
Missouri
I'd suggest selling the Sigma 18-50, 18-70, and D100. Use the $$$ to buy a used Tamron 17-50.

Take a look at the Tamron 17-50 thread. I just bought one (my 2nd copy) and am loving it. I had the Nikon 17-55, and the Tammy is just as good for about 1/3rd the price...but it doesn't focus quite as fast (it's close). Just spend the time to find one without the built-in motor. I'll post some photos after this weekend.

While the non-BIM version does focus faster on bodies like a D90/D300,e tc...the BIM version focuses faster on the D40 :) Since he has a D40 as well, I'd suggest holding out for a BIM version that way he has AF on all of his bodies. Sharpness is the same and I'd sacrifice a little in the way of focus speed to gain the ability to use the lens across all my gear.
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
15,552
Location
Los Angeles, USA
I'd get the 17-55. If you want the best DX mid-range zoom it's the Nikon 17-55. It's a no-compromise lens. I've also owned the 18-70 which is a great lens, but the 17-55 is that much better in terms of optics, construction, sharpness and low light abilities.
 
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
5,861
Location
Payson AZ
Thanks everyone. The Tamron looks interesting. Great reviews. My D40 has the 70-300mm mounted to it and they seem to go well together. The D50 is my Wife's camera as well as the 18-105mm.

I gave $115 for the D100 in like new condition. The seller didn't think it worked and didn't have a battery to find out. It works perfectly. :smile:
so as a combo package the D100 should do OK I would think.

I'm going to investigate the Tamron a little closer.
 
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
75
Location
Cali
Go to nikon 1755.

Go straight to nikon 1755, do not pass go and do not waste hundreds of dollars on anything else.
 
Joined
Oct 11, 2007
Messages
2,483
Location
Missouri
Go to nikon 1755.

Go straight to nikon 1755, do not pass go and do not waste hundreds of dollars on anything else.


Why? If he goes straight to the 17-55 then he WILL be wasting hundreds of dollars unless he needs superior build quality. All other factors are equal or better with third party in this range. I know the 17-55 is a hoss, but there is just too many incredible third party options in this range.
 
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
5,861
Location
Payson AZ
Why? If he goes straight to the 17-55 then he WILL be wasting hundreds of dollars unless he needs superior build quality. All other factors are equal or better with third party in this range. I know the 17-55 is a hoss, but there is just too many incredible third party options in this range.

I don't need the build quality as I'm an armature hobbyist. Addicted hobbyist at that. :smile:

I just picked up a like NIB for $325. The reviews show equal and sometimes better optical performance so I bought a Tamron.

Honestly it looks like the $$$ is in the build more than anything. I don't need that.
 
Joined
Oct 11, 2007
Messages
2,483
Location
Missouri
I don't need the build quality as I'm an armature hobbyist. Addicted hobbyist at that. :smile:

I just picked up a like NIB for $325. The reviews show equal and sometimes better optical performance so I bought a Tamron.

Honestly it looks like the $$$ is in the build more than anything. I don't need that.

I agree completely and I don't think you will be dissapointed. My Tamron 17-50 f2.8 is the lens I feel most comfortable with shooting wide-open more than any other lens...even my Sigma 50mm f1.4. It's really just a sharp lens no matter where you put it and it produces great color/contrast.
 
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
4,991
Location
New England
Why? If he goes straight to the 17-55 then he WILL be wasting hundreds of dollars unless he needs superior build quality. All other factors are equal or better with third party in this range. I know the 17-55 is a hoss, but there is just too many incredible third party options in this range.

Agreed. I shot more than 15,000 pics with the Tamron 17-50mm. It was my companion for hikes all over the East coast. I sometimes hike in Winter, above 4000 feet, in places known for horrible weather condions: White Mountains of NH, for example. One simply needs to exercise common sense while using any lens/camera in extreme conditions.

The price/performance ratio of the Tamron 17-50 2,8 is tough to overlook. I always found it built more than tough enough. Are there better built lenses? Of course there are. The better question is do you need the better built lenses. After 3 years with the Tamron, I sold it & it still looked and performed like new: I had to sell gear to fund my move to the D700. The excellent Tamron warranty needs mentioning too.

I know the Nikon 17-55 is a great lens, but some of us are forced to go with less expensive options in order to access our goals.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2008
Messages
662
Location
Hollywood, USA
Looking at your kit, if I was you, I'd be thinking ultra wide, not midrange.

Stopped down, most midrange zooms have great image quality. The main differences between them is speed and build quality. For me, I wouldn't upgrade something I already have until I had 12mm to 200mm covered in some way, shape or form.
 
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
5,861
Location
Payson AZ
Looking at your kit, if I was you, I'd be thinking ultra wide, not midrange.

Stopped down, most midrange zooms have great image quality. The main differences between them is speed and build quality. For me, I wouldn't upgrade something I already have until I had 12mm to 200mm covered in some way, shape or form.

I have the 70-300mm VR.
The D100 and 18-70mm Sigma are for sale
The d50 and 18-105mm VR are my wife's
I like the 18-70 and buying it new and they don't make
them anymore I'll hang on to it.
 
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
11
Location
Loma Linda
I'd suggest selling the Sigma 18-50, 18-70, and D100. Use the $$$ to buy a used Tamron 17-50.

Take a look at the Tamron 17-50 thread. I just bought one (my 2nd copy) and am loving it. I had the Nikon 17-55, and the Tammy is just as good for about 1/3rd the price...but it doesn't focus quite as fast (it's close). Just spend the time to find one without the built-in motor. I'll post some photos after this weekend.

I am looking in to upgrading my kit lens as well and upon reading reviews, I had it narrowed down between Tammy 17-50 non BIM and Sigma 17-50 2.8 EX OS HSM. The tammy is hard to find and sigma is a bit more expensive. Where did u end up finding your tamron Bourboncowboy if u don't mind me askin?
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom