DSLRUsers.com

unfortunatelty my better half does not share my love of primes and i have crumbled under the pressure so need to buy some sort of "walkaround" zoom lens.

i have previously owned the 18-200 and was less than impressed so i dont really want to go down that road. the other alternatives i see are:

16-85VR...supposed to be sharp but hell its pricey.
24-120VR...i cant find anyone who says a positive thing about it.
18-105VR...seems ok.
18-55VR...too short.

can anyone share any experiences and give me a hand pls. much appeciated.
ps: the 17-55 and 24-70 et al are not options.

Ive had a brief play with the pricey 16-85 and would consider it. From what I have heard the 18-105 is worth a look at, hopefully I'll get a play with one soon.

Have you considered the the Tamron 28-70 f/2.8 (a little on the short and not-wide side though, I was going to ask about the 17-50 - my walk around, but you have already said the 18-55 is not an option)

Rooz wrote:24-120VR...i cant find anyone who says a positive thing about it.

Chris,

Where have you been asking? No problems with mine.

Hi
I agree with Gary ,I have no problems with my 24-120 VR.

Jeff

If price is a factor then go for a second hand 35mm -70mm F2.8.......you can pick up an excellent one for around $450 and the image quality will meet professional standards.

Also the 18-200 but maybe more than required considering your other gear

gstark wrote:

Rooz wrote:24-120VR...i cant find anyone who says a positive thing about it.

Chris,

Where have you been asking? No problems with mine.

AHA ! thats what i want to hear ! i've been told, (and have read), its soft as all hell. for me its the ideal pick cos the range is more to my liking and its an FX lens so will carry over with my plans for next year. theres usually a bunch of thee used so its now back on my radar.

cam, tamrons and sigma's are out as a general rule, once bitten twice shy. i've used the tammy alot, (and owned both the 18-50 sigma and 17-50 tamron), and my main issues with them is piss poor AF speed. i cant deal with that.

matt: thanks mate, have looked at the older 2.8's and while i would be more than happy with them, the girl wants something smaller and lighter.

thanks for the replies.

Rooz wrote:cam, tamrons and sigma's are out as a general rule, once bitten twice shy. i've used the tammy alot, (and owned both the 18-50 sigma and 17-50 tamron), and my main issues with them is piss poor AF speed. i cant deal with that.

No worries, I know what you mean by the slow AF.

Chris, use it 1.5 - 3 stops in from wide-open to find the sweet spot. Good value, nice build quality. AF speed is fine on a D300.

yepp, have heard that the af-s is great. which is just what i'm after. i was always just a bit worried about its optical quality. now just to find a good used one...(they are bloody pricey new aswell !). curse you aussie dollar !!!!!!!

3 on flea-bay right now. ECS had a couple 2 weeks ago for around the $500 mark. all they have now is some alder af-d ones.thanks again guys, much appreciated.

cam: i had 2 tamron 17-50's. both were faulty and had to be returned. i didnt go for a third time ! i loved the lens optically and my mates 28-70/2.8 is awesome but they are just so god-awful slow. primes have spoilt me so badly for IQ...i have to keep reminding myself i'll probably rarely use it.

Sorry to hear about the your bad experiences with the Tamron. Can I ask how they were faulty?

aim54x wrote:Sorry to hear about the your bad experiences with the Tamron. Can I ask how they were faulty?

first one had a faulty AF mechanism and wouldn't AF. the second one had bent plastic on the front barrel and the lens cap wouldn't clip in. originally bought from D-D. they refunded after the second fault.

Rooz wrote:one had bent plastic on the front barrel and the lens cap wouldn't clip in. originally bought from D-D. they refunded after the second fault.

That sounds really dodgy!! Faulty AF seems likely to be manufacturer fault, but bent plastic sounds dodgy! This has to be the first time I have heard of dodgy Tamron's though. Shame you had to suffer two in a row.

aim54x wrote:

Rooz wrote:one had bent plastic on the front barrel and the lens cap wouldn't clip in. originally bought from D-D. they refunded after the second fault.

That sounds really dodgy!! Faulty AF seems likely to be manufacturer fault, but bent plastic sounds dodgy! This has to be the first time I have heard of dodgy Tamron's though. Shame you had to suffer two in a row.

it was quite strange cos it obviously had never been dropped or hit, not a scuff mark on it. when you held it at an angle though your could see the plastic had warped or didnt come out of the mould right cos it was a little on the wonky side. anyway...shit happens, no biggie. i loved the 90/2.8 tammie while i had it.

sheesh...i've been thru some lens' !!! lmao

Rooz,

if you want to have a look at a 24-120VR (or AFD as well) I have a spare one, it's not in perfect condition, but still works well. If you'r einterested ... and I owe ya one .. you're welcome to have it for a while to check out

Cheers
Tom