Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 13, 2018, 12:19 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 3
Default Travel lens for D7000

Hi

I am taking a trip with my wife and 2 kids to Spain. I am trying to decide which lens should I take with me. I have Nikon D7000 and would like to travel as light as possible.

Option 1: Nikon 18-140 and Nikon 50 mm

Option 2: buy tamron 16-300

Looking for some suggestions

Sunny
Sunny2645 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 15, 2018, 6:46 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Wingman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Hebron, Kentucky (northern Kentucky/Greater Cincinnati):KCVG
Posts: 4,339
Default

I used a Tamron 18-270 with my D7100 for many years during travels including hiking in the mountains and the compact size and extended zoom was perfect. I have recently switched to an Nikon 18-200 mm as my walk about lens. However, I believe the Tamron 16-300 would serve you well for your travels.

Jehan
Wingman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2018, 7:48 AM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wingman View Post
I used a Tamron 18-270 with my D7100 for many years during travels including hiking in the mountains and the compact size and extended zoom was perfect. I have recently switched to an Nikon 18-200 mm as my walk about lens. However, I believe the Tamron 16-300 would serve you well for your travels.

Jehan
Jehan,

I do have a tamron 18-200 F 3.5 - 6.3 lens. Will buying 16-300 be a good investment?

Sunny
Sunny2645 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2018, 9:21 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,693
Default

The Tamron 18-200 is pretty bad, with loads of distortion, vignetting, field curvature and chromatic aberration. The Tamron 18-270 is an improvement. The Nikon 18-200 is about as good a superzoom lens as there is.

For all the hype, the 16-300 isn't as good as the 18-270 (the non-PZD version).
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2018, 10:27 AM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
The Tamron 18-200 is pretty bad, with loads of distortion, vignetting, field curvature and chromatic aberration. The Tamron 18-270 is an improvement. The Nikon 18-200 is about as good a superzoom lens as there is.

For all the hype, the 16-300 isn't as good as the 18-270 (the non-PZD version).
Would you recommend not purchasing the Tamron 16-300 and stick with Nikkor 18-140 instead
Sunny2645 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2018, 3:15 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,693
Default

Unfortunately, the 18-140 is no prize either, but since you already have it, I'd say use it if you don't think you'll need the longer focal lengths.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:39 PM.