Nikon 24-120VR and 18-200VR for general wildlife/nature

[DigitalPhotography]

If you own or have worked with either or both the Nikon 24-120VR or 18-200VR, can I get your comments on these lenses?* I would like to know if you are pleased with the overall sharpness, color fidelty and build quality.* I will be buying either one or the other and will use it for general wildlife/nature and travel.

[cyclohexane]

Just about every single Japanese traveler with a Nikon DSLR I saw in Hokkaido had the 18-200 mounted. I think that's a testimony to the quality. While Japanese tend to love to be part of a trend, I doubt they're all using the 18-200 because "everyone else is". It's earned top marks from the CAPA "Super Book" series; Thom Hogan also rates the 18-200 quite highly. Most people do not rate the 24-120 very highly, though Moose Peterson has been on record to say that, in general, he liked the lens. Personally, I'd pick the 18-200 if I was buying one of the two, as it gives you more range at both ends.

[Hokum]

TBH i wouldnt rate either, 200mm is too short for wildlife, i use a 70-300D ED at a push and even that is too short.

If you want to take nice pics look to the 80-400OS its not much more then a 18-200VR.

Now if you planning on using hides or remote control the 18-200 maybe ok but as a walkabout wildlife no.

As a general walkabout lens the 18-200 may float your boat...

[Nikonfreak]

My neighbor purchased the 18-200, I think I mentioned that here before. I've tried the lens and would definitely prefer it to the 24-120VR.

My impression is that the 18-200 is a respectable lens. Both of these lenses are too short for wildlife use, but would serve you well as a general purpose lens. Lower light conditions will challenge both of them both with higher ISO requirements and focus lock in... as well as a need for a hot shoe flash with the 18-200 when additional illumination is needed or even when you need fill flash.

Both are variable aperature lenses so you should understand what that means for the kind of shooting you might do at various focal lengths and what effect that will have on DOF or for lower light shots at the lens' longer end.

I'm not a huge fan of the 24-120 VR for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is price, distortion, and slow aperature for such a short focal range.

Julio

[dvdowns]

I have the 18-200vr and love it . As mentioned maybe not for wildlife but a really wide range for just about everything else .

[Nikonfreak]

I can clearly see how folks really like the 18-200 as a one lens solution for a walk-around lens or vacation lens.

It's very very good. Most of you know that I was a big skeptic about that lens, but in all honesty, It's worth the money and it's a really solid performing lens. It's quite good and better than what you'd expect out of a zoom with such a long range.

Julio

[RJohnston]

There are many kinds of "wildlife" so you have to decide according to what you use the lens for it if is suitable for you. These were shot with the 18-200 as an example...
1.


2.


3.


Have the 70-300 but use the 18-200 abour 95% of the time.

It depends on how close you can get to your subject...

[Jeff Perry]

I have both the 24-120 and the 18-200. The 24-120 is relegated to the D3 body and the 18-200 rides along on the DX bodies. I have been pleased with the performance of both as "walk-about" lenses. I tend to agree that except for close-proximity the 200 mm is too short in most cases. At the Miami Metro Zoo for instance, nothing short of 400 will really do (except for close encounters with the giraffes).

Jeff

[Dirk]

photo 1 is unvisible; 2 has been oversharpened 3 is the best..

[RJohnston]

Originally Posted by Dirk

photo 1 is unvisible; 2 has been oversharpened 3 is the best..

Actually what you are seeing is the separation from the background, which was altered, so it was less intrusive. Posted on my website as a 400x I believe, somehow when posted here it is larger. On my website shown about 1/4 that size, so the line around the bird and feeder did not show.

Don't know what happened to the first one, except large sizes on my website are locked out. That may not have shown up so may have chosen one too large. Will see what I can do.

If over sharpened I believe it would show artifacts on the bird also.

[shadowlands]

RJohnson... that little photo/church/cross on or near your signature? I know that place! Been there! It's in Sedona Arizona!!!

Originally Posted by RJohnston

Actually what you are seeing is the separation from the background, which was altered, so it was less intrusive. Posted on my website as a 400x I believe, somehow when posted here it is larger. On my website shown about 1/4 that size, so the line around the bird and feeder did not show.

Don't know what happened to the first one, except large sizes on my website are locked out. That may not have shown up so may have chosen one too large. Will see what I can do.

If over sharpened I believe it would show artifacts on the bird also.

[shadowlands]

I adore my 18-200 VR lens. Sold it once.... tried the Sigma 18-200 OS, and then traded back to my Nikon 18-200 VR. It's a work horse.

[RJohnston]

Yep that is the Holy Name Church, the only one located in a National Park. It took an act of Congress to get it built there.

That little picture is one of my paintings of the Church. For over 39 years we came to Sedona and the Grand Canyon from CA, so I could paint these areas. Finally we moved to Cottonwood AZ 20 miles south of Sedona, and about 140 miles from the Grand Canyon. In my opinion, Its the closest thing to Heaven on earth.

[Dirk]

@ shadowlands .. interesting since i seem to like the sigma becuase of the price.. What are the differences in IQ and uasage on you D80 between the 18-200vr and the 18-200 os ?

really appreciate your info on them two ..

[shadowlands]

You're a very lucky person to live in that area.
I'm a big fan of Arizona, in general. I'm from Boulder Colorado so I love western landscapes, naturally.
But today I'm living in Houston, Texas... no scenery at all... Have to get out to extreme West Texas for scenery and blue sky....

Originally Posted by RJohnston

Yep that is the Holy Name Church, the only one located in a National Park. It took an act of Congress to get it built there.

That little picture is one of my paintings of the Church. For over 39 years we came to Sedona and the Grand Canyon from CA, so I could paint these areas. Finally we moved to Cottonwood AZ 20 miles south of Sedona, and about 140 miles from the Grand Canyon. In my opinion, Its the closest thing to Heaven on earth.

[shadowlands]

Dirk,
Honestly for me, it was just the love of the Nikon version. I wanted the Sigma for it costs less and it had the "lock" switch on it. I wish Nikon had done that.
But what I didn't like about the Sigma version was the zoom ring. Why? I wasn't use to it... I was use to the Nikon... So I switched back to Nikon.
But I didn't have any issues with Sigma's image quality. It took great images.
If you like your Sigma... keep it... and enjoy... you'll get years of use with it.

Originally Posted by Dirk

@ shadowlands .. interesting since i seem to like the sigma becuase of the price.. What are the differences in IQ and uasage on you D80 between the 18-200vr and the 18-200 os ?

really appreciate your info on them two ..

[Douglas]

Wow. 3 year old bump

I had the original 24-120 lens about 10 years ago. Loved that lens. Not as sharp as others, but it did the job on my N90s. Never had the 18-200, but considering the range, you cant beat the versatility of the lens. Short of any pro work, it will cover about 90% of anything you would need. The other 10% being low light or where 200 is too short.

[RJohnston]

Originally Posted by shadowlands

You're a very lucky person to live in that area.
I'm a big fan of Arizona, in general. I'm from Boulder Colorado so I love western landscapes, naturally.
But today I'm living in Houston, Texas... no scenery at all... Have to get out to extreme West Texas for scenery and blue sky....

We moved to AZ after we retired. I've taken lost of trips to CO also. Breckenridge, Silver Springs or other camping locations in the mountains mostly. Denver for conventions, etc... Would live there also, except for the cold, as I had frostbite in Korea and cold really bothers me since then, main reason I moved from MA to CA and now live in AZ instead of CO. There is snow in Sedona, but its warm in the daytime and it does not last long.

But, the jeep tour over the Continental Divide was one of my Lifetime Highlights. Pink Jeep tours in Sedona, etc are another photo trip everyone may enjoy.

My motto was "Live today, you never know if you can live tomorrow." So we always traveled, some years on a motorcycle, some in a Van, now in a Motorhome.

When we retired moved to AZ, if you look for Mather Campground, ELK you will see some shots that I caught.

[Dirk]

just to keep it clean the only multi zoom i have now is the Tammy 28-200 , i wished i had the money to buy the sigms 18-200 DC OS but there is also a 18-125 OS .. i think that if the normal rules apply the 18-125 will be optically better due to lesser range than the 18-200 os?

Any updates on that are welcome .. also looked at 24-120 VR , some say it takes soft pictures

@ jeff perry

Can you confirm this ? is there much difference in the IQ between a 24-120 VR and the 18-200 VR ??

really appreciate any update on this.

ps the tammy works great it is only used 2 -3 times because i mostly use up to 70mm * 1.5 = 105 mm (on my D70/D50)

[MrB]

I have used both the 70-300 and 18-200 VR's and neither has enough reach for my taste. Quality-wise, they are ok.