Nikon 18-105, 18-140, and 18-200 mm question

Lonnie

Hi Folks,

I have been looking for an upgrade lens for lightning photography. Have been using the 18-55 mm kit lens with my D3200. The prices on all these lenses are from around $100.00 to $300.00. Will these lenses work on the D3200? Is there anything I should be aware of before making an upgrade? One YouTube reviewer mentioned that the 18-200 mm can have lens creep. Most of the time my camera is pointed upward toward the sky. Lens creep is not going to work. Is there any reason I should pick the 18-105 mm over an 18-140 mm when they are both the same price? I do not want to exceed the limitations of the D3200.

Thank you,

Lonnie

bruto

The only one I have experience with is the 18-140, which was the kit lens on a D7100 when my wife got hers, and which she still uses on her D7200. I've used it on the D3200, and it was quite happy there. It's a good lens, one of the sharpest zooms Nikon makes, and is well behaved. About its only drawback is linear distortion which is a non-issue for fireworks. Any zoom can have lens creep, but rotating zooms will generally do better than push-pull. However, with age and use any zoom can develop creep. On my very loose 16-85, I had a rubber band to hold it in place when off level. You can even buy dedicated bands that are a bit wider than a normal heavy duty rubber band, for that purpose. It is, of course, a bit of a hassle to do this, but it does work. Remember too that when pointing up, a creeping lens will generally go wider, which is not such a terrible thing if you're running it wide anyway.

You should probably look around at other reviews, but it's my understanding that the two sharpest zooms in DX have been the 18-140 and the horribly expensive 16-80E. I got an on-sale refurb of that latter for my D7100, but even at 40 percent off, it's pricey, and if you don't crave the wider angle, the 18-140 is a way better deal. Again, I'm not sure about the others, but the 18-140 is good right out to 140, which makes it a nice lens for traveling, since that amounts to a pretty decent telephoto as well.

e.t.a. just for the record, the older 16-85 DX is also a good lens, but not as sharp as the 18-140, and almost always more expensive if it's a good one. I like and use the wider angle fairly often. I had a well-used gray market one of these and it served well, but it did have a back-focus issue making it less than stellar on the D3200. I later used it on the D7100, where it did better, but it then developed an aperture problem (on a once-in-lifetime trip to Bhutan!) which is why I now have the very nice and very expensive 16-80E.

Lonnie

I have been looking forward to your advice. Thank you very much. eBay is flood with these 18 mm lenses. They can be bought for 100 to 300 dollars easily.

Lonnie

Would I violate the purity of my Nikon D3200 if I bought a Sigma or Tamaron lens?

bruto

These days some of the third party lenses are a pretty good deal, and worth looking at. I'd be a little cautious of older ones, because quality control and sample variation seem to have been a little low on some, and repairs difficult. According to my local camera repair guru, older Sigmas are pretty much a throwaway because parts cannot be found, and internal structural quality is not that great. On the other hand, repairs on Nikon are pretty iffy too, especially older ones, so perhaps it depends on price. I'd look seriously at non-Nikon brands if they offer something you need, assuming the vendor can be trusted. Make sure you know all the terminology for any brand, as in some cases similar sounding lenses may have different AF mechanisms and the like.

Lonnie

Okay, it is good to remember. Thank you