Nikon 18-105mm f3.5-5.6 AF-S DX VR vs Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6 DC

Though this isn't really a fair comparison, my Sigma 18-125mm doesn't have HSM or OS, in many other ways these lenses are quite similar.  Both have roughly the same focal length and the same maximum aperture, and are aimed as a relatively inexpensive all round zoom.  The Sigma however, is significantly smaller; being lighter, thinner and shorter; which has big benefits if you are intending to take it as a travel lens.  Interestingly the direction of zooming is the opposite for each lens - counter clockwise on the Sigma, clockwise on the Nikon.  Both lenses also have a similar minimum focal distance of about 50cm.

Optically, both suffer from lots of barrel distortion at 18mm and mild pin cushion at maximum telephoto, both traits typical for this type of lens; and easily fixed in Photoshop.  

Sigma 18-125mm @ 18mm

Nikon 18-105mm @ 18mm

Sharpness at maximum telephoto is quite similar and I couldn't really tell much difference.  Neither will out resolve the D90's 12MP sensor at any aperture or focal length, but I did notice more consistent colour and contrast from the Nikon.  

Sigma 18-125mm @ 125mm

Nikon 18-105mm @ 105mm

  

The other big advantage of the Nikon is Vibration Reduction, or Optical Stabilisation.  Later variants of this Sigma lens have this, and it enabled me to not worry at all about shutter speed when shooting objects for this test on the Nikon.  Conversely, with the Sigma I had to reposition some objects for this test to ensure no shake.

 

Without doubt, the Nikon is the handier lens, mostly because it has VR.  Other than that, the Nikon's only other advantage is the built in SWM lens motor which lets it Auto focus on more recent Nikon consumer bodies.  The extra size though is also a bit of a pain when travelling.

However, if you have an older or mid-range Nikon body that has the screw drive for focussing, the Sigma is a good deal as these run for about half the amount of a Nikon 18-105mm on the used market.  You could buy this Sigma lens used with a used D50 or D70 or body and still not spend over $250, which makes it a cheap, high quality travel camera; that you don't have to worry about as much as if you took $4000 worth of Nikon D800 and Nikkor 28-200mm lens combo.  It's also a much better deal than a (small sensor) compact at the same price.

So, in conclusion, if you have the money and can deal with the larger size, buy the Nikon.  If not, the Sigma will work very well for you, and you can buy a 50mm f1.8 with the money you saved.

My Used D-SLR Kit Recommendation

Most people tend to purchase a combination of new and used equipment, and my general rule of thumb is buy the body new and the lenses used.  Bodies are much more prone to problems, while lenses will last forever as long as they aren’t dropped.  However, for this reason, resale on lenses is far better than on bodies.  If you bought a new body and lens, expect that in 3 years time the body will be worth 35-45% of the original value; while a lens could be worth 60-70% of its original value.

Here’s my used kit recommendation, again for Nikon with approximate used values in US/Canada shown:

1^st Purchase – Semi-pro body with great features and a versatile lens - Nikon D200 (about $400) with Nikkor 18-135mm f3.5-5.6 (about $175), or a Nikkor 18-105mm f3.5-5.6 VR ($240)

STEP UP: The D90 ($650) or D300 ($800) are also excellent choices and have available video.  For a better lens, take a look at the excellent Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 (about $350).  The cheaper D80 at $300 is also a very good camera.

FOOTNOTE: Both the D200 and D300 meter with manual focus lenses, making them very versatile, and allowing the user to try also sorts of great manual lenses for a not a lot of outlay.

2^nd Purchase – Fast Aperture Prime – Nikkor 50mm f1.8 AF-D (about $100) or Nikkor 35mm f1.8 AF-S (about $220)  There’s lots of options in this area, and you could also consider the Nikkor 50mm f1.8 AF-S (about $200), the Nikkor 35mm f2 AF-D (about $270) and Manual Focus lenses if you bought a D200.   

STEP UP: This means going to a very fast f1.4 and the options here are Nikkor 50mm f1.4 AF-D (about $270), the Nikkor 50mm f1.4 AF-S and a Sigma 50mm f1.4 AF-S (both about  $430).  The latter two step up lenses are the best, but you pay a premium.

3^rd Purchase – Nice Lighting – Nikon SB-600 ($200) Excellent flash that works well

STEP UP: The SB-600 is great, but I like the more powerful SB-800 ($300) better.  Don’t buy any other flash but Nikon for a Nikon camera; or Canon for a Canon camera as the electronics aren’t always 100% compatible.

4^th Purchase – Follow your interest – wide, tele, macro?

Wide – Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 (about $420)  This is a great lens that offers excellent value.

Tele –Nikon 70-300mm f4-5.6 G (about $120) OR Nikon 70-300mm f4-5.6 VR AF-S (about $450)  If you can stretch, get the lens with VR as telephoto lenses are very susceptible to camera shake and  vibrations, which leads to blurry pictures.   The non-VR is good for a telephoto taste though.

Macro – Tamron 90mm f2.8 (about $250, $350 for Di version) OR Nikon 60mm f2.8 AF-D (about $350)  Both are excellent lenses.  If you bought a wider prime, get the Nikkor 60mm; however if you bought a 50mm lens, get the 90mm Tamron. 

Nikon D2X with Nikon 18-135mm

My New D-SLR Kit Recommendation

Recently I was chatting to my brother in law, and he like lots of other people who are just getting into photography, asked me what D-SLR kit they should be buying and what they should get in the future.  I know there are definite limits to this guide, including price point, features, photographic interests, but I’ll give it a go anyway.

As I know Nikon best, I’ve kept this review to Nikon, but the same comments mostly translate to Canon. Here’s my recommendation:

1^st Purchase – Nice body with a versatile lens - Nikon D5100 $719 with 18-105mm VR lens $379 (step up to a D7000 $1179 if you want an outstanding body, or to a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 $469 if you want a fast standard zoom)

WHY: Getting a body like the D5100 with features a step up above the base allows you to explore more things, without getting overly sophisticated or pricey.  The 18-105mm VR is a lot more flexible and usable than the standard kit zoom, giving the user almost double the zoom range.  

STEP UP: The D7000 is really a semi-pro camera in capabilities, but won’t intimidate a beginner.  It has outstanding image quality with excellent low light capabilities and will also meter with manual focus lenses and the AF will work with those lenses that don’t have a built in focus motor.  The Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 trades zoom range for fast aperture, allowing shallower depth of field and much better low light capabilities.

2^nd Purchase –Fast Aperture Prime - Nikon 35mm f1.8 AF-S $279 OR Nikon 50mm f1.8 AF-S $249

WHY:  A small, cheap lens that allows you to explore the world of shallow depth of field photography.  Both are excellent optically and won’t break the bank.  I prefer the wider 35mm as this focal length on a DX camera is very similar to that of the human eye. 

3^rd Purchase – Some light on the subject - Nikon SB-600 Speedlight $279 (or step up to a SB-900 $539)

WHY: A good flash is an excellent choice, allowing for much better portraits and having the ability to create much, much light than the in-camera flash.  The more recent SB-700 is also excellent.  I don’t think the SB-400 has enough use above the in-camera flash to warrant purchasing it.

STEP UP: I much prefer to have more light available to me than not enough, so that is why I chose the SB-800 (predecessor to the SB-900).  More light allows for better fill flash on bright, sunny days, and will allow more options and power to bounce flash in large rooms.  Everyone I have recommended to get the biggest flash they could have never regretted it.

FOOTNOTE: Stay away from third party flashes.  Often the camera electronics don’t talk to each other perfectly, creating improper exposures.  Nikon’s flash system is outstanding, and I wouldn’t mess with it.

4^th Purchase – Follow your interest, is it wide, tele or macro?

Wide – Sigma 8-16mm $899 OR Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 $589.  Both are excellent lenses, thought the 10-20mm is outstanding value, while the 8-16mm is the widest rectilinear (ie not fisheye) available today.

Tele –Nikon 70-300mm f4-5.6 VR AF-S $539 (or step up to a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 $999 or Nikon 80-200mm f2.8 AF-D $1249).  The key here is to get a lens with VR (Vibration reduction).  This feature is very important with telephoto lenses that are susceptible to camera shake.  Non-VR equivalents can be had for around $200.  For the step up f2.8 lenses, the same VR recommendation holds true, but they are very expensive; however the fast aperture f2.8 helps reduce shake.  The above lenses are outstanding optically, offer excellent value, but are not VR.

Macro – Tamron 60mm f2 $569 OR Nikon 60mm f2.8 AF-S  $579, OR Nikon 85mm f3.5 VR AF-S $499 OR Tamron 90mm f2.8 $499.  All of these lenses are outstanding.   If you bought the Nikkor 35mm, I’d get the Tamron 60mm Macro, however if you bought the Nikkor 50mm, I’d get the longer Tamron 90mm Macro.

WHY:  Once you get going your interests will naturally tend to gravitate to a certain area of photography.  If you want to try different options, a good idea is to rent lenses before you buy them.  A number of shops do rentals, and in Canada, both Headshots and Vistek are the best known. 

Have a look at my Used D-SLR recommendations, my D-SLR accessory recommendations and my Full Frame recommendations as well.

Nikon D2X with Nikon 18-135mm

FOOTNOTE:  Unless you develop very focussed interests, stay away from specialist lenses like fisheyes and tilt-shift lenses.  These lenses are quite expensive (except for the nasty fisheye add ons you can buy) and you don’t get much use out of them.  I’ve probably used my Sigma 15mm fisheye only a handful of times in the last 8 years.  Rent them if you really want to try them out.

Plastic mount vs metal mount

Recently I bought a Nikon 18-105mm VR lens really cheap, as it had a broken mount.  These lenses often break the plastic mounts through either being dropped or forced the wrong way when taking them off.  I was thinking about this and wondering why Nikon would make such a crazy design flaw.

Then my wife’s friend showed me her D200, the camera which I had helped her purchase a while back.  She had given it to someone to hold on to briefly and that person had then promptly dropped it, breaking the lens mount on the attached Nikon 18-105mm VR lens.  The camera was fine, and to my surprise, everything else on the lens was fine.  No stiffness in the zoom, fully functioning electronics and no cosmetic damage.

This got me thinking – maybe Nikon had intentionally designed the camera so that a cheap to replace part always breaks upon impact, thereby saving the camera and the lens from excessive shock impact.   Then I remembered an incident about 10 years ago: my mother had dropped my Nikon F90X with Tokina 28-70mm f2.8 mounted on the front.  Though the camera wasn’t damaged, the lens barrel was bent, and the quote to fix it up was more than the lens was worth.  In other words, all the shock had been transmitted into the internals of the lens, causing extensive damage.

I asked my friend at Nikon about this and he said that yes, the plastic mount was designed to break on impact.  On more expensive lenses with metal mounts, a plastic part behind the mount is designed to break for exactly the same reason.  Very interesting how a perceived drop in quality can actually save your lens!

Cornwall Hotel roof - Nikon D90 with Nikon 18-200mm VR lens

Leica CL vs Sony NEX - side by side

In the last post I wrote about how similar the Leica CL and Sony NEX seemed to be.  Here’s a shot of the two cameras side by side, both with compact Voigtlander lenses.  Interestingly, the effective focal length of both cameras is quite similar – a 21mm lens on a NEX has an equivalent full frame field of view of 31.5mm.

I took the shot with an extra cheap D70 and Nikon 18-105mm VR lens I just bought (more on this later).  It was lit with a Nikon SB-800 Speedlight.