I am new

lurechunker

I'm new to Nikon and this forum. I am buying the D500 with 200-500. What shorter lens should I get? Do you recommend the 18-140?

Searcy

My Nikor DX 35mm 1.8 is my cheapest and favorite lens.

FreezeAction

Welcome to NR. I have an 18-140 lens and one of the best 17x22 images I've ever printed came from using it on a D5300. I don't think 3 MP less would make much diff.

spraynpray

I know you asked for one,but with the 200-500/D500 combo, I'd say 16-80 and 70-200 f4. Brilliant set-up.

lurechunker

I am very interested in the 16-80 and would appreciate opinions from those who have used it.

spraynpray

I have it. It is the best DX 'kit' lens they've mad IMHO.

vtc2002

Welcome to NR. I use the D500 for work and it's a great camera. The 200-500mm stays on it the majority of the time. I have used the 18-140mm and it is a good lens. It is weak between 18 and 24mm and when wide open. It is best between 24-140mm, stopped down to f8 to f16. I have not used the 16-80mm. I agree with @FreezeAction comment I have seen some great images using the 18-400mm and @spraynpray recommendations and that you will have a pretty sweet setup.

webmastadj

Welcome! I have the 200-500 with the D500 and it is a great combo. I also purchased the TC1.4 just for that extra reach when needed. For a shorter lens I own the 18-140mm which was the kit lens for the D5600 when I bought it. Like others have stated, it is a great lens and gives you close to the useful 24-200 range on DX (considering crop factor). I also have the DX 35 f/1.8 which is a great little fast lens on DX.

From experience, I would suggest if there is any chance that you will go FX, to purchase FX glass. May cost more up front, but will make the transition later cheaper. I purchased the 70-200 f/2.8 and have never looked back. Also just purchased the 24-70 f/2.8 which will make my favorite trinity: 24-70 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, and 200-500 f/5.6. All will be used on my D500. I will still use the 18-140mm for when I need to go wider than 24, but currently I rarely shoot below 24mm.

lurechunker

I am mostly a birder and will use the 200-500 for that. I also like to do clouds over the ocean just before sunrise. Would the f/1.8 35mm be good for that? Trying to avoid a divorce.

sport

I really liked the 35mm f/1.8 when I was shooting dx. It seemed to be the go to lens for general photos.

Pistnbroke

18-140 brilliant and cheap grey ..have two used for a couple of years ..no problem
You want one lens to do everyting except when birding and not changing lenses and letting dirt in ....

ggbutcher

I now have a 18-140 welded on my D7000, replaced a 18-200. IMHO the best compromise of full-range zoom vs image quality for 16MP, and I've read others who are satisfied at 24MP. If you want tack-sharp it's not going to satisfy, but for web-sized images I think it works just fine.

NSXTypeR

Depends on what sort of work you want to do and how wide you want to open up your wallet. I know it's far and few in between, but if you want to do mainly macros, a 35mm prime won't do you any good, although DX shooters tend to like that lens a lot. A good general purpose zoom like many have said is the 18-140.

The 35mm AF-S DX is also another nice option if your budget is tight.

lurechunker

I'd appreciate comments on the Sig 17-50 to go along with my birding lens.

retread

I have the Sigma 17-50 it is a great lens. Especially at the price.

heartyfisher

The sigma 17-50 f2.8 was the sharpest "normal" zoom lense when it first came out. I think it was one of the first sigmas just before the "ART" series.. which used their new design/testing processes.. sort of the precursor of their successful "Art" development process. Its cheap too now..

I also understand the usual sigma AF compatibility issues need to be considered. others with hands on experience may comment.. I really know nothing :-) just researched quite a bit as I was considering lenses in this range for a long time...

Although nowadays I would seriously consider the 16-80 nikkor... F2.8-4.0.. also an issue/factor with these 2 is the Price.

Msmoto

How about someone starting a discussion on a specific lens/body as desired and let the newcomers drop info here as related to their introduction to the Forum?

Thanks much

Hiker

retread said:

I have the Sigma 17-50 it is a great lens. Especially at the price.

I have the Sigma 17-50 on my 7200. It's my walk around lens. If I need wider, which is a necessity in Horseshoe Bend or Meteor Crater, I put on my Tokina 11-20mm f2.8. I have noticed a "softness" at 50mm, but I hardly use that focal length. The only reason I noticed it was there was a baby Praying Mantis resting on my outside wall that I shot. Used this combo with great results, despite it being mid day, in the Grand Canyon last week.

retread

Hiker said:

retread said:

I have the Sigma 17-50 it is a great lens. Especially at the price.

I have the Sigma 17-50 on my 7200. It's my walk around lens. If I need wider, which is a necessity in Horseshoe Bend or Meteor Crater, I put on my Tokina 11-20mm f2.8. I have noticed a "softness" at 50mm, but I hardly use that focal length. The only reason I noticed it was there was a baby Praying Mantis resting on my outside wall that I shot. Used this combo with great results, despite it being mid day, in the Grand Canyon last week.

I also have the 11-20 f2.8 if I need wider. Seldom go wide but a good lens when I need it. I shoot with a D5100 and a D500. My son has a D7200 but I have not used it yet.