Walk around lens - Both FX and DX

TaoTeJared

How is the bokeh effect at far end (f 4.5) on this lens?

DX you will get next to nothing. Pushed to 85mm and shooting close, you could get some bokeh. If you want bokeh - then you don't want a walk around lens.

How about 24-120 f3.5-5.6 lens?

Run away from this one. I still have one, it is not as sharp as a 18-105. It is just one of those few "ok" lenses.

I believe, 18-200 might be an overkill for what I'm looking at. I won't be using that since I have N70-200, the best lens that I have so far.

There is nothing wrong with overlap - remember you are talking about a walk-around lens, something that you don't have to take a second lens for. Many make the mistake of doing what you said, and then are frustrated they they always have to take a second lens around, or don't have the reach they want. I have 3 lenses that cover the 70-200 range - all have different purposes and are very different in use. Only One, (70-300vr) do I want to carry all day.

spraynpray

I shoot wide angle shots (landscapes, cityscapes etc.) quite a lot and find that I rarely need wider than 16 or longer than 70-80 so the 16-85 is on my list if I stay with DX.

TriShooter

@spaynpray For DX cameras the 16-85mm is a little jewel; you will enjoy using it, and it is delightfully sharp with excellent contrast.

DaveyJ

I agree with TriShooter the 16-85 Nikkor should be a more used walkaround lens. For some reason I never bought one yet and now that I am semi-retired adding a new lens becomes very difficult.

Swame_sp

@TTJ, I think that's the downside of having an SLR to change lenses to the situation. I'm not sure if 18-200 would be a help for me. I'm sure it would make me lazy. I could be wrong.

Since I cannot afford (financially for now) to have two set of lenses for DX and FX, I need to buy one which will last. Either break the bank and buy an used 24-120 f/4 or buy 24-85 (f3.5-4.5). Looks like there is no other FX-DX best combinations from Nikon.

TriShooter

I agree with TriShooter the 16-85 Nikkor should be a more used walk-around lens. For some reason I never bought one yet and now that I am semi-retired adding a new lens becomes very difficult.

I am sympathetic to your situation. At the beginning of 2008 I had a six figures retirement having retired in the late 1990s, and a healthy 401k plan. I told my financial planner in writing to put everything I had into T-Bills in August/September of 2008, and it was not done.

In the first quarter of 2009 my assets were worth almost 50 percent less, and the company where I had worked for over 30 years as business unit leader went bankrupt, and stopped my pension without even sending a letter to warn us. I felt like a deer caught in the headlights.

Whoever it was that made the comment "safety is an illusion" knew what he was talking about. lol. But actually I am a better man today for having had this happen. The experience strengthened my belief that GOD, family, and friends, in conjunction with what we know, our life experience, and maintaining a genuine desire for continuous learning are essential, not only for survival, but for having a good life. ;D

TriShooter

@TTJ, I think that's the downside of having an SLR to change lenses to the situation. I'm not sure if 18-200 would be a help for me. I'm sure it would make me lazy. I could be wrong.

Since I cannot afford (financially for now) to have two set of lenses for DX and FX, I need to buy one which will last. Either break the bank and buy a used 24-120 f/4 or buy 24-85 (f3.5-4.5). Looks like there is no other FX-DX best combinations from Nikon.

The Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 AF zoom lens is FX, and a very decent lens for the money. It takes a slight color correction to my eye, and some lens are sharper than others, so if you buy one make sure you buy it from a good dealer with a decent return policy if it is not sharp enough, but most of them have decent sharpness. They generally go for between $400 - 500.00 used, and under $900 new.

Edit for elaboration: For concerts, and bands the color shift toward green to me, is probably a small concern, but more important is that this lens has optimum sharpness at F/2.8 wide open, but wants F/4 at the high-end of its zoom range to keep its sharpness. I have forgotten at what focal length it takes F/4 for good sharpness, but know it was at the high-end of the zoom range.

DaveyJ

@TriShooter: A remarkable history and outlook! The depth of talent and wisdom often shared on Nikon Rumors is really inspiring! The good thing for us is that it doesn't take a ton of gear to take good photos. Since I have switched to Nikon DSLR and especially from the D200 forward an a few good lens I couldn't ask for much more. Video is somewhat more demanding in many ways. I do admit one of my favorite walkaround cameras and lens to just use is the D90 and the 12-24DX Nikkor. But if you want telephoto when suddenly a wolf appears and the scene is majestic, either you'd have to be close or the wide angle approach just doesn't work. That is why I think as a catch all lens you need at least something in the 85mm top end or quite a bit more. most of the time when I am shooting wildlife photos 300mm even on DX is less than optimum. Still the 18-200VR comes the closest i have seen to doing it all. The good part is the excellent walkaround lens should last all of us way into our retirement years.