One of two lenses to my D5100

The 1.8 35mm I have replaced the 2.8 40mm Micro because sharper. If I want to minimize weight and outstanding image quality, I have the 2.8 40mm Micro (with me 1 year), otherwise the 18-105 because one but is much more flexible in my D5100 so. The photos need thanks to the built-in the D5100, automatic image processing (the time of recording), in particular the distortion correction for the lens and the Active D-Lighting (on car), to be rarely reworked (Picasa, Snapseed). I take on in JPG Fine, expect in IrfanView subsequently down to 80% -jpg-quality, because the images then are better than with a lower JPG quality level directly in the camera.

Without distortion correction, the distortion would be the well-18-105 (disabled by default the D5100!) And very disturbing, but the correction is a non-issue. (The 2.8 40 Micro needs no distortion correction and is not corrected by the D5100.) More light intensity you wish for more, but the high ISO numbers irgendwofür recent housing must indeed be good (SB400 f. Bounce harmonizes well) , My default setting for the Auto ISO setting is 1/200 and a maximum of ISO 1600. All automatics permit together focusing on motive and neck and as easy and as fast as good pictures than ever before (I had a D40). If there is still room for improvement, then in the area autofocus. But I can not judge whether the occasional blurring a problem of the housing / of the Scene Recognition System are (the D5100 has only one cross-type sensor and a total of a little bit autofocus sensors) or 18-105. Overall, the quality is so good that I see no further need to purchase a few years to come.