Jump to content

Welcome to NikonForums.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Advice: Buy Nikkor AF-S DX 18-140 f3.5-5.6 or Stick with Tamron 18-200 f3.5-6.3


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1
focusandearnit

focusandearnit

    New Member

  • Forum Member
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Country Flag

Hi everyone,

 

New here. Upgraded my very rusty but trusty Nikon D50 to a Nikon D7500 - a massive upgrade in literally every way. I had fallen out of the photography world for quite some time due to work, but now find myself with more time and desire to get back into it, especially with a one year old and baby on the way - lots of photo opportunities to come. I purchased a Nikon refurbished D7500 for $689. Just got it yesterday. Shutter count when I received it: 0. I bought a three year accidental damage warranty through Amazon, better than the 90 days Nikon gives.

 

A while back I bought a Tamron 18-200 f3.5-6.3 Macro lens. It's been a good lens from as far as I can tell, I like its adaptability. Though in truth I rarely zoom out to 200mm, and photos taken that far away are typically less than ideal (though this was on a D50). Notably, I was living overseas for 6 months when I bought it, but I'm not sure if that matters or is relevant at this point - I bought it 8 years ago. This is the lens I bought. I'm not sure it's made anymore, but that product page is accurate.

 

As I took the plunge to get the D7500, I investigated and learned about the advantages of AF-S and some of the Nikkor specific advantages like vibration reduction. I went ahead and bought the AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6. This is a renewed lens for around $245 on Amazon. We'll see what I end up getting - I've heard of people getting gray market items through this, and some people get actually refurbished Nikkor lenses. Amazon has a generous return policy so I took the plunge. This also has a 3 year accidental warranty purchased, again better than nothing.

 

My question for you is this: is it worth it? I'm not sure it is and am second guessing my purchase. Does anyone have any insight into the tangible benefits I would have in sticking with the new Nikkor lens over the Tamron?

 

Benefits of Nikkor:

- newer

- I'm guessing a higher quality lens

- vibration reduction

- silent wave motor

- "extra low dispersion" glass, whatever that means

- warranty

 

Benefits of Tamron

- I already own the lens  :lol:

- extra zoom

 

Both have similar apertures and both have aspherical lenses.

 

What will I be doing with this? Mostly capturing precious family shots. I am an avid hiker and plan to take this out into the wilderness. In that setting, I will likely use this versatile lens as well as my 50mm f/1.4 in that setting. I am considering picking up a 35mm f/1.8 for this scene as well, though that is another thread for another day!

 

Anyone have any thoughts?



#2
bluzman

bluzman

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 665 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationNorth Texas

One of the lenses I bought when I got my first DSLR (a Nikon D5600) was the Nikon AF-S DX 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR. It quickly became my "go to" walking around lens. If I did my part, the lens always produced fine images. When I sold the D5600, that lens went with it as part of the deal. Now my APS-C DSLR is a D7500. I missed the 18-140mm and started to look for a replacement. In my case, I got a Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM Contemporary lens. I did this mainly because I liked having the extra reach at 200mm (vs 140mm) and I already owned two other Sigma "C" series lenses with which I was very happy.

 

As you've noted, one way that your current Tamron 18-200mm differs from the Nikon 18-140mm in that it doesn't have image stabilization (VC). If you think that you'd still like to have the 18-200mm range but also want image stabilization, you might consider returning the Nikon 18-140mm and getting one of these.

 

https://www.amazon.c...l/dp/B013HXY21E

 

https://www.amazon.c...o/dp/B00HS3DTBE



#3
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,588 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

The 18-200 you have was one of the better superzoom when you bought it. It is, however, more of a 18-165 lens or so as the contrast gets mushy at longer focal lengths. The 18-140 is a very good walkaround lens but they fill about the same needs.

 

The VC is a big plus for the Nikon, but the greatest difference is that the Tamron is designed for the 12 MP sensors that were current when it was introduced and can, more or less, handle 16 MP. The 18-140 is designed around the 24 MP family of lenses and handles the pixel density of these demanding 20-24 MP DX sensors without showing lots of optical artefacts. 

 

The upgrade is well worth doing as you can get it at a reasonable price.