18-55 VR kit lens worth keeping? « Nikon Rumors Forum

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

18-55 VR kit lens worth keeping?

(48 posts) (24 voices)

Tags:

No tags yet.

« Previous 12

studio460

preferred member
Joined: May '10
Posts: 1,231
offline

Attention: all AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR lens owners--HELP!

I really like my AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR kit lens! It's tack-sharp, super-compact, and its VR really helps to make up for its slow f/3.5 aperture. I basically only shoot it at 18mm, so it's like having a $100 VR super-wide!

Quick question: for any of you that have this lens, is the front (internal) lens barrel (the part that contains the front element) supposed to be able to be moved left-to-right? Mine is able to be moved left and right by several millimeters. It's apparently hinged, and moves in a small arc. I thought I broke mine, and was about to buy another one, but all of a sudden the AF started working again! Just trying to determine if I actually did break something inside the front barrel mechanism or not. Seems to shoot just fine.

Posted 2 years ago #
tcole1983

preferred member
Joined: Feb '10
Posts: 1,553
offline

studio460 said:
Attention: all AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR lens owners--HELP!

I really like my AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR kit lens! It's tack-sharp, super-compact, and its VR really helps to make up for its slow f/3.5 aperture. I basically only shoot it at 18mm, so it's like having a $100 VR super-wide!

Quick question: for any of you that have this lens, is the front (internal) lens barrel (the part that contains the front element) supposed to be able to be moved left-to-right? Mine is able to be moved left and right by several millimeters. It's apparently hinged, and moves in a small arc. I thought I broke mine, and was about to buy another one, but all of a sudden the AF started working again! Just trying to determine if I actually did break something inside the front barrel mechanism or not. Seems to shoot just fine.

Not sure I know exactly which part you are referring to, but from what I can remember the lens is manually focused by the end of the barrel isn't it?

Posted 2 years ago #
studio460

preferred member
Joined: May '10
Posts: 1,231
offline

tcole1983 said:
Not sure I know exactly which part you are referring to, but from what I can remember the lens is manually focused by the end of the barrel isn't it?

Thanks for your reply, but, no, the rubberized, manual focus ring is on the main, stationary barrel. The internal barrel is the part that moves in and out during zooming, and rotates while auto-focusing. I can swing this part left-to-right by about 15 degrees.

Posted 2 years ago #
Drab

preferred member
Joined: Aug '10
Posts: 540
offline

studio460 said:
Thanks for your reply, but, no, the rubberized, manual focus ring is on the main, stationary barrel. The internal barrel is the part that moves in and out during zooming, and rotates while auto-focusing. I can swing this part left-to-right by about 15 degrees.

No. The very end of the extensible inner barrel is ribbed (not for her pleasure but) for manual focus. The rubberized part is the zoom ring. (IIRC both switches (lens and body) need to be on MF to enable manual focus.(no where near 100% on this point, though.))

There should be some slop in the barrel when in AF mode, but 15 degrees of movement is only achievable when in manual focus mode. In AF mode the lens should only have around 1 to 2 degrees of slop.

The VR is a slightly paler color than the non-VR variant, and has a consistently sized inner barrel, whereas the non-VR has a slightly increased diameter MF ring at the end. Both variants use a front-focus system meaning the front barrel rotates, making polarizer and gradient filter use a pain in the keister.

Posted 2 years ago #
studio460

preferred member
Joined: May '10
Posts: 1,231
offline

Drab said:
No. The very end of the extensible inner barrel is ribbed (not for her pleasure but) for manual focus. The rubberized part is the zoom ring. (IIRC both switches (lens and body) need to be on MF to enable manual focus.(no where near 100% on this point, though.))

There should be some slop in the barrel when in AF mode, but 15 degrees of movement is only achievable when in manual focus mode. In AF mode the lens should only have around 1 to 2 degrees of slop.

Ah . . . duh! You're right--it's the zoom ring that's rubberized. Okay, so I have an 18-55mm with 15 degrees of play in AF-S mode, and it's definitely the VR version. So, it's "broken," yes? I wouldn't be so concerned if this weren't one of the sharpest wide-angle lenses I own! I just tested it against my AF 18mm f/2.8D and AF 14mm f/2.8D, and this little $99 "kit" lens kinda kicks their ass. The darned thing still seems to shoot okay (again, the auto-focus magically began working again).

I wish Nikon would just make an AF-S 18mm VR fixed lens, without the exposed, protruding barrel design. For one this sharp I'd be willing to pay a LOT more!

Posted 2 years ago #
Gareth

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 591
offline

what the hell are you shooting at 18mm that you need vr?

as for

"If I had to chose a lens for FX as a prime it would be the 24mm not the 35mm."

do you have fx?

sorry for being confrontational, but i have to ask.

Posted 2 years ago #
studio460

preferred member
Joined: May '10
Posts: 1,231
offline

Gareth said:
what the hell are you shooting at 18mm that you need vr?

Umm, almost everything. Night exteriors, poorly lit interiors, dusk, etc.

Gareth said:
"If I had to chose a lens for FX as a prime it would be the 24mm not the 35mm."

Where is that from? I only have DX bodies currently (although, I also have an N90s "full-frame" 35mm SLR). The 35mm prime is one of my favorite focal lengths on FX. If I had an FX body, I would want both, the 24 f/1.4 and the 35 f/1.4. I actually prefer primes, and already have almost every short, fast prime in either AF or AI-S.

Posted 2 years ago #
Gareth

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 591
offline

sorry, the quote was from davey J

as the the first, why dont you use a tripod?

Posted 2 years ago #
studio460

preferred member
Joined: May '10
Posts: 1,231
offline

Tripods aren't practical in many situations (and are prohibited in certain areas). Also, tripods call a lot of attention to your photo-taking. Plus, they really slow you down. Of course, for long time-exposures, a tripod is necessary. I do typically always have a monopod with me, but not a tripod. Having VR and fast lenses simply enable more shooting opportunites . . . but, I think this discussion belongs in another thread.

Is my lens broken or what?

Posted 2 years ago #
Gareth

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 591
offline

sorry. i cant help you. i can only suggest trying more copies in a shop.

i guess i dont shoot wide and long exp. much

Posted 2 years ago #
jerl

preferred member
Joined: Dec '10
Posts: 425
offline

It's been awhile since I've used an 18-55, from the sounds of it, I'd definitely say yes, no lens should have that much play in one of its elements. I think that the question is then whether it's worth getting repaired or just replaced.

Posted 2 years ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

studio460 said:
Ah . . . duh! You're right--it's the zoom ring that's rubberized. Okay, so I have an 18-55mm with 15 degrees of play in AF-S mode, and it's definitely the VR version. So, it's "broken," yes? I wouldn't be so concerned if this weren't one of the sharpest wide-angle lenses I own! I just tested it against my AF 18mm f/2.8D and AF 14mm f/2.8D, and this little $99 "kit" lens kinda kicks their ass. The darned thing still seems to shoot okay (again, the auto-focus magically began working again).

I wish Nikon would just make an AF-S 18mm VR fixed lens, without the exposed, protruding barrel design. For one this sharp I'd be willing to pay a LOT more!

I don't think it's broken, you're just annoyed at its terrible build quality. I tried the 18-55, I didn't buy it because I hated the focusing mechanism. I went for the 18-135 instead.

I would love for Nikon to make an 18mm 1.8 prime for DX and price it around the 35mm 1.8.

jerl said:
It's been awhile since I've used an 18-55, from the sounds of it, I'd definitely say yes, no lens should have that much play in one of its elements. I think that the question is then whether it's worth getting repaired or just replaced.

I never liked the 18-55 for its flimsyness.

Posted 2 years ago #
Drab

preferred member
Joined: Aug '10
Posts: 540
offline

NSXType-R said:
I don't think it's broken, you're just annoyed at its terrible build quality. I tried the 18-55, I didn't buy it because I hated the focusing mechanism. I went for the 18-135 instead.

I was playing with two as I replied to him.

10-15 degrees is impossible while in AF mode. If he has that much play the inernal clutch isn't engaging, or some other problem. Remember this is not a "true" AF-S lens which allows instant override at any point in time. It _requires_ one to flip the switch before twisting the MF ring.

The one degree of play I spoke of when the AF clutch is engaged is already a generous description. It was less than that on both the samples I was playing with.

Posted 2 years ago #
studio460

preferred member
Joined: May '10
Posts: 1,231
offline

Thanks for everyone's replies! Very much appreciated! The weird thing is, it shoots fine. I know it's just a cheap plastic lens with pseudo-AFS, but the darned thing sure is sharp! I don't know if it's broken or not--been meaning take it to Nikon since xmas anyway.

Another thing about the VR. I was playing with my AF 18mm f/2.8D, A-B'ing the two lenses, and found that the 18-55mm's VR totally compensates for its slow f/3.5 maximum aperture. Meaning, I could shoot with the same sharpness at the longer shutter-speed demanded by the smaller f/3.5 aperture, thanks to its VR (although this wouldn't affect subject motion). This only re-enforced my strong affinity for VR on ALL lenses, even on super-wide angles.

Posted 2 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

studio460 said:
This only re-enforced my strong affinity for VR on ALL lenses, even on super-wide angles.

Some people called me crazy around here when I said I wanted to see a 24-70 2.8 with VR. They asked, Why would anyone need VR at wide angles like that? Then the 16-35 f/4 VR came out, and I think it's only a matter of time now.

I just don't understand why you wouldn't want it if you can have it, especially for video where even large apertures don't help stop camera shake, but VR does.

Posted 2 years ago #
aslightdelay

preferred member
Joined: Jul '10
Posts: 327
offline

FWIW, I've only used the 18-55 a handful of times, both in AF and MF. 10-15 degrees seems to me more a sign of a broken lens than anything else. Unless you got a prototype 18-55 tilt-shift? ;)

Posted 2 years ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

studio460 said:
Thanks for everyone's replies! Very much appreciated! The weird thing is, it shoots fine. I know it's just a cheap plastic lens with pseudo-AFS, but the darned thing sure is sharp! I don't know if it's broken or not--been meaning take it to Nikon since xmas anyway.

Another thing about the VR. I was playing with my AF 18mm f/2.8D, A-B'ing the two lenses, and found that the 18-55mm's VR totally compensates for its slow f/3.5 maximum aperture. Meaning, I could shoot with the same sharpness at the longer shutter-speed demanded by the smaller f/3.5 aperture, thanks to its VR (although this wouldn't affect subject motion). This only re-enforced my strong affinity for VR on ALL lenses, even on super-wide angles.

jonnyapple said:
Some people called me crazy around here when I said I wanted to see a 24-70 2.8 with VR. They asked, Why would anyone need VR at wide angles like that? Then the 16-35 f/4 VR came out, and I think it's only a matter of time now.

I just don't understand why you wouldn't want it if you can have it, especially for video where even large apertures don't help stop camera shake, but VR does.

I honestly don't mind the Nikon VR system- the 105 macro is my first lens with VR and I can shoot stupid slow shutter speeds with that lens. Yes I need to figure out what my lower threshold is, but it's still amazingly cool that I can get away with slower shutter speeds. With macros it's not much of an issue with slow shutter speeds, most of the time things aren't trying to get away from you very quickly anyway.

Posted 2 years ago #
tcole1983

preferred member
Joined: Feb '10
Posts: 1,553
offline

NSXType-R said:
I honestly don't mind the Nikon VR system- the 105 macro is my first lens with VR and I can shoot stupid slow shutter speeds with that lens. Yes I need to figure out what my lower threshold is, but it's still amazingly cool that I can get away with slower shutter speeds. With macros it's not much of an issue with slow shutter speeds, most of the time things aren't trying to get away from you very quickly anyway.

The VR really kind of makes the lens fool proof. You can be pretty sloppy and still get good pictures with it on. I was having to shoot all my pictures at Christmas while sitting in the car since I was driving and they still for the most part turned out great.

Posted 2 years ago #
studio460

preferred member
Joined: May '10
Posts: 1,231
offline

jonnyapple said:
Some people called me crazy around here when I said I wanted to see a 24-70 2.8 with VR. They asked, Why would anyone need VR at wide angles like that? Then the 16-35 f/4 VR came out, and I think it's only a matter of time now.

I just don't understand why you wouldn't want it if you can have it, especially for video where even large apertures don't help stop camera shake, but VR does.

I so totally agree, jonny. I can take "impossible" shots handheld with it. Who says no one ever shoots a wide-angle in less than ideal light? If Nikon made a 16-35mm f/2.8 VR, I'd be all over it, but the f/4.0 VR is the only wide VR lens Nikon makes (other than the fragile, but sharp, 18-55mm). Plus, that 16-35mm is rather pricey. Does anyone know if it has the same "protruding" barrel design as its lesser siblings? I would think not, presuming that it's a true, internally focusing AF-S lens.

Posted 2 years ago #
PB PM

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 2,217
offline

I agree with studio and jonny, VR is great. I use my 18-55mm VR the same way. I took some hand held photos at dusk in late December with the 18-55mm VR that I never could have taken with my Tokina 12-24mm lens. Sure the Apertures are similar, but VR really saved the day!

Posted 2 years ago #
studio460

preferred member
Joined: May '10
Posts: 1,231
offline

PB PM said:
I agree with studio and jonny, VR is great. I use my 18-55mm VR the same way. I took some hand held photos at dusk in late December with the 18-55mm VR that I never could have taken with my Tokina 12-24mm lens. Sure the Apertures are similar, but VR really saved the day!

Yup! I basically use my 18-55mm VR as a cheap 18mm wide-angle "prime" with VR. Since my AF Nikkor 18mm f/2.8D is softer (and, because it's also an FX lens), I've now relegated for use with my "full-frame" N90s exclusively. Hopefully, the larger format will mitigate its slightly less-sharp character a bit. Plus, an 18mm lens sure looks gorgeous on a full-frame camera!

Posted 2 years ago #
spraynpray

preferred member
Joined: Feb '10
Posts: 1,514
offline

I had to awaken this old thread because I just bought one of these lenses to go with my wife's first DSLR body and so now have an opinion on whether they are worth keeping or not. I was a little skeptical about the claims of some of the posters above, but I found that OK, it is slow so no chance of any shallow DoF work, but it has VR and this example is a really sharp little sucker! So far I have only shot it around the house but during the coming week we will be out shooting and I'll post a pic here. It is significantly sharper than my 18-105VR to the extent that I am looking to sell it for a 24-70 f2.8.

Posted 7 months ago #
donaldejose

preferred member
Joined: Mar '11
Posts: 1,043
offline

I think the 18-55 VR "kit" lens is greatly underrated. I originally bought one with my wife's D3100 as an all around "snapshot" zoom for her to learn with but was soon impressed with its sharpness, versatility and lightness. It even focuses close enough to shoot flowers and branches. When you expect good light and want a minimum weight mid-range zoom, it fits the bill excellently.

Posted 7 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

« Previous 12

Reply

You must log in to post.

The new Nikon Rumors Forum is now live at http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussions. This forum is now in "read only" mode until I figure a proper way to import all data over to the new platform. Please register over at the new forum.

18-55 VR kit lens worth keeping?

Reply