Nikon 18-55 mm Lens Worth Selling?

[Artful Dodger]

Hello,
Since I bought my Nikkor 18-200 mm VR lens I doubt I will be using the 18-55 mm lens that came with my D50 anytime soon. With that said should I keep it for a rainy day or would it be better to sell it to someone that would put it to better use? What I also have but won't get rid of is the Nikkor 50 mm which I really like so that one is a keeper as is the 18-200 mm. Once the Tokina 11-16 mm becomes readily available then that will be added to my bag but will I be missing or have a gap that most others have found out themselves?
Most of the photos I tend to take are either within 10 ft. or pretty far away so I don't get the hurt put on me (mostly by me ) or because I couldn't get close even if I wanted to.
Thanks for the advise.

 

[Mr.Noisy]

the 18-55 doen't sell for a Lot, best thing to do is put it in your camera bag, there will come a time when you'll want to use it, plus anything happens to the 18-200 you got a lens to use for a while, thats what i kept the 18-70mm for, anything happens to my 70-200 then i've a lens to use for a while before i get another lens or any repairs need doing.

 

[GoCubsGo]

I vote for keeping it as well. You can't rely on having only one lens anyway. Electronics fail and you may be happy to have that little one around at a later date.

 

[cube]

I'd trade it for a 50mm f1.4 or f1.8

 

[Everythingisnt]

I would keep it as it doesn't really sell for that much.. Plus it's always good to have an extra lens handy if anything should happen.

 

[Abstract]

Why would anyone buy that lens? I've always wondered about that.

 

[cube]

Well, I bought a used D70 body and I needed a cheap standard zoom to go with it, which the 18-70 from the D70 kit is not, so I got one of these 18-55 in excellent shape for less than what it would cost new.

The bad thing is that DxO has the D50+18-55 or the D70+18-70 combination, but not D70+18-55.

 

[taylorwilsdon]

Why would anyone buy that lens? I've always wondered about that.

I think its a great little lens for what it costs ($80 or so used). I put it on my backup body and beat it around for 4000 shots and it held up beautifully. The 18-70 is a better choice, but it costs double.

Canon's 18-55, thats a different story. The non IS version is really awful. Nikon's kit lens, on the other hand, is pretty solid.

 

[Everythingisnt]

I think its a great little lens for what it costs ($80 or so used). I put it on my backup body and beat it around for 4000 shots and it held up beautifully. The 18-70 is a better choice, but it costs double.

Canon's 18-55, thats a different story. The non IS version is really awful. Nikon's kit lens, on the other hand, is pretty solid.

True, but for $80 you can get an excellent used Nikkor 1.4.

 

[Westside guy]

Well, the non-VR version sells for around $100 (US) new. What would you get for a used one - maybe half that? If you sell to a camera store, it'll be even less.

Think about the logistics for a minute. If you sell to a camera store, then it's just one trip - so you're ahead maybe 30 or 40 bucks. If you sell locally on Craigslist (for example), then you may have to go somewhere to meet potential customers a few times. You might get 50 or 60 dollars, but you'll probably be spending at least half that in terms of gas, your own time (people never factor this in; but how much is your time worth?), and so on.

In the end I'd just hang onto it. At some point you might want to have it around - who knows?

 

[cube]

On ebay.com it goes for around $75.

 

[Artful Dodger]

Well, the non-VR version sells for around $100 (US) new. What would you get for a used one - maybe half that? If you sell to a camera store, it'll be even less.
In the end I'd just hang onto it. At some point you might want to have it around - who knows?

I was leaning that way unless I could get a nice deal on the Tokina at the local shop and trade that one in towards it but it's not a pressing issue really. Put it away for a rainy day for now and see what happens.

cube I'd trade it for a 50mm f1.4 or f1.8

I have one already which I got last year after reading up on it and seeing some nice photos.

Abstract Why would anyone buy that lens? I've always wondered about that.

I got a great deal on the body with kit lens at the local shop and at that time they didn't offer a very good price on any other lenses but I do wonder the same thing after using it for a few years even at the casual level. Most family events it's been better to have my 50 mm on and just move to where I need to be. Now with the 18-200 mm I just got those functions are more than covered.

 

[ChrisA]

Hello,
Since I bought my Nikkor 18-200 mm VR lens I doubt I will be using the 18-55 mm lens that came with my D50 anytime soon.

There are not many buyers for the 18-55 as "everyone" already has one. But when it comes time to sell the D50 it will sell faster if it is complete with a lens. Pack it up well so it still will look good.

 

[cherry su]

Keep it as a backup

 

[ChrisA]

Why would anyone buy that lens? I've always wondered about that.

The Nikon 18-55 is very good. It's only problem is that it is slow at f/5.6. But other then that, within the 18-55 range and f/5.6, it compares well to other lenses. It typically sells new for about $100. Hard to find a better quality to cost ration than that. For many people the 18-55 range is all they really need.

The newer Nikon 18-55 VR is not quite as good as the old 18-55 but Niokn had to come out with a VS to compete with Canon's 18-55 IS. The Nikon VR lens suffers more from lens flair than the older 18-55, likely because of the extra elements inside.