Source
r/Nikon•
G19Gen3

I need a nicer walk around lens for an upcoming trip

D3300. My 35 1.8G lives on my body, and I love the lens. I love the bokeh, and I REALLY love the sharpness. I like being able to zoom to 100% when editing and see clean lines, even if I don't print that large.

That said, I do feel a little limited with that lens, and while I try to love my kit lens, I just hate it. What's a good walk around lens? 17-50 sigma? The sharpness and bokeh of the 35 is what I'd like to come closest to with something that can go a little wider. I find I don't use zoom very often, and when I just had the kit lens I found that most of the time I was taking pictures at 24mm (I'm not converting, that's where the lens was set).

So with all of that in mind, help me please. I once looked through an 11-16 tokina...wasn't real impressed. I felt it was too wide for the kind of pictures I like to take (landscapes and portraits in landscapes).

Posted May 4, 2018, 6:36 PM UTC

628
dread_pirate_ryan•

Seems like the Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 might be what you’re looking for. I’ve not used it, but most reviews are very positive. Can be had used for about your price range.

6
Cash_for_Johnny•

This... it is out of the price range you listed above (999ish new) but this lens is the bees knees on the dx bodies.

4
rpungello•

(999ish new)

It's currently $700 new, but that's still above the $500 budget OP listed in another comment.

1
Cash_for_Johnny•

whoops must have missed the proce drop. my bad

1
d4vezac•

I spent a while shopping them about two years ago, and even then they were $800 new. Ended up getting mine refurbished from Sigma about a year and a half ago for $600.

1
DanielJStein•

I’m not really sure what your budget is, but maybe the Nikkor 24-70 f/.28G non VR might be a good choice. Used they run around $800 last time I checked for a clean copy. The lens is sharp even at 2.8, especially in the center. You have the freedom of being at 24mm (38mm equivalent on your body) and 70mm (112mm) with the same lens at the consistent, wide, aperture of f/2.8.

5
shnaptastic•

24 x 1.5 = 36, 70 x 1.5 = 105, no?

2
DanielJStein•

Yeah you are right, I was doing the math with a 1.6. I used to shoot primarily Canon and that is where I got my convoluted number from.

1
GMan_SB•

Tamron G2 version is amazing I have it on my D500 it’s so sharp and range is perfect

1
ipoopedonce•

Where are you able to find this for &800? I normally see $1200 online

1
DanielJStein•

Check fredmiranda. Very good copes are going for $950, but if you are willing to sacrifice a couple scuffs on the barrel of the lens without effecting the optics you can score a good deal. I got a 70-200 f.2.8 VRII and 24-70 f/2.8G in a bundle off Fred for less than $2k.

2
ipoopedonce•

Damn congrats

1
GMan_SB•

Tamron 24-70 f.28 G2 is the best, I almost got the sigma 18-35 but the range of 24-70 is exactly what you need for trips I brought mine to Europe I’m so happy with it’s performance, super sharp, super fast and spot on focusing. Worth every penny.

3
bolanrox•

the 17-50 is my walk around lens.

That or if you think you want wider instead look at the 10-24 Tamron or 11-20 Tokina's

2
spcshiznit•

Used Nikon 17-55mm f2.8.

2
JackStalk•

I wouldn't get the sigma. it's the same focal range that you already have. You can get good photos with the kit lens. What's your budget? The 35 1.8 is effectively the same focal range as a 50mm on full frame.

1
G19Gen3OP•

Probably under $500 but I would look for used or refurbished as well. My intent would be to ebay the kit lens at some point. I hate it. The range is fine but it just doesn't compare to the clarity of the 35 and I can always feel it in the photos.

3
JackStalk•

If you like the range, then by all means sell the kit lens and get the 17-50. I would personally recommend sticking with a prime. My first lens other than the kit lens was a 35 1.8 and after going through years and tens of thousands of dollars worth of pro lenses I'm looking back into the 35 1.4 focal length because it is just that good.

1
RodStiffington_•

going through years and tens of thousands of dollars worth of pro lenses I'm looking back into the 35 1.4 focal length because it is just that good.

Same here. I can gladly just take a 35 or 24mm as my only lens on a trip. Carrying all those pro zooms isn't fun.

1
misterfourex•

OP doesn't have a full frame.

The 17-50mm f2.8 would be a great lens for them

2
burning1rr•

I disagree. IMO, the 17-50 is a solid upgrade on the Nikon kit 18-55. That ƒ2.8 is wide enough to get good soft backgrounds at 35mm and above. It's pretty sharp, it's optically stabilized.

1
burning1rr•

An interesting thing about the 35 is that it will tend to get you good Bokeh, or good sharpness, but not both at the same time.

I kinda agree with what you discovered for yourself... 24mm-28mm is a very good 'walk around focal length for DX.

I own the Tamron 10-24. It's a good lens, but like most DX UWAs, it's not optically perfect. It's pretty good through the center of the frame, but softens up a bit at the edges. It improves at 24mm and by stepping down a bit, but it's never perfect.

There are a few interesting lenses out there... Sigma sells the 18-35mm ƒ1.8 zoom. It's fast, it's very sharp. Probably better in practically every way than the 35 ƒ1.8 DX TBH.

Tamron has the 15-30 ƒ2.8. It's big, heavy, bulbous, but it's a fast VR lens, and it's full-frame compatible. I have a hard time imagining what it would be like to use it on a D3300 though.

Sigma, Tamron, and Nikon all have fast normal lenses on DX. Those are generally a good buy, and a great upgrade on the 18-55 kit lens. Sigma has the 17-50 and the 17-70, Tamron has the 17-50, Nikon has the 16-80.

1
G19Gen3OP•

Thanks!

2
shnaptastic•

Interesting about good bokeh/sharpness “not at the same time”. You mean at the typically sharper middle apertures around 5.6-8? Or as soon as stopping down makes the bokeh non-circular? Or something else?

1
burning1rr•

https://www.imaging-resource.com/reviews/zproducts/nikon35f18g/zz_sampleindex.htm

It's okay at ƒ1.8, but noticeably improves as you stop down to ƒ4. A bit of of softness usually isn't a problem for portraits though. Longer lenses like the 85 or high end primes like the Sigma Art primes tend to be very sharp wide open. Hard to do on a double gauss variant like the 35 or 50 though.

1
ipoopedonce•

You could try the Nikon 24-120 refurbished or used. I got mine for $600 refurbished. Might be $500 used.

1
Phrexeus•

Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 Art if you have the patience for a little AF inconsistency sometimes (it's worth it for that image quality though), or Nikon 16-80mm f/2.8-4E VR? Should both be easy to find used.

1
heytterebea•

not the best buy maybe look for sigma 17-70mm? it has variable aperture though, between 2.8 and 4. pretty sharp and cheap too.

1